4 ms·
I believe they should have closed source the OS, Android being open-source is the number one reason for its fragmentation. What i dont understand is the "securi
by pankajdoharey 6y ago
I believe they should have closed source the OS, Android being open-source is the number one reason for its fragmentation. What i dont understand is the "security" logic given by fuchsia. How is Linux less secure ? I dont think anyone starting a new kernel now can guarantee its security to be superior to Linux, because Linux had 25 yrs of evolution to where it is now. That logic is pure garbage, the real reason probably is NIH. And if Google ever actually hopes to compete with iOS technologically it better choose a superior stack and fuchsia is far from it.
- dan-robertson 6y agoI think this assumes that all OS designs have equivalent levels of security, but if this is true then why are there security-focused operating systems like seL4? Also I think that without the backwards compatibility requirements of Linux, one could probably have features that improve security (eg sandboxing of some kind)
- pankajdoharey 6y agoLinux container is a sandboxing feature.
- Cthulhu_ 6y agoI do believe building a new OS from scratch - taking the learnings of the past 25+ years into consideration - will lead to a better and safer OS. I mean for Linux they had to invent a lot of new concepts, replace a ton of things for security reasons, etc. It's secure NOW, and it was secure enough since its inception (I presume?), but it's the cumulative effect of years of polishing. I mean search the kernel for references to use-after-free or null pointer dereference. Since then, there's been big improvements in development practices, tooling, and languages to prevent security issues from occurring in the first place.
- pankajdoharey 6y agoSure but thats a lot of work and things arent as simple as they seem there is always a risk of introducing newer bugs. So why switch?