As far as I understand SecurityManager, it is vastly different from capability based security. In a system based on capabilities you would explicitly have to p

As far as I understand SecurityManager, it is vastly different from capability based security. In a system based on capabilities you would explicitly have to pass capabilities to any code which needs them (either as arguments to the call, or when loading the library – depending on what is natural). This means that priviledge is naturally minimised and transparent. Compare that to SecurityManager where you have make a separate policy and checking process, separated from the actual calling of functions. There was some work done to try to define a capability safe subset of Java (Joe-E was the name [0]). But it is sad that this is not the default security behaviour in Java, and thus no libraries use this. [0]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe-E https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe-E