3 ms·

I genuinely can't think of anything else I'd rather use less than this. I think MAC (Mandatory Access Control) applied to a desktop environment, picking a bett

I genuinely can't think of anything else I'd rather use less than this. I think MAC (Mandatory Access Control) applied to a desktop environment, picking a better language than C and actually thinking about stuff is more than sufficient to get around the existing problems... Virtualization is just another pile of complexity and performance problems to deal with. It's not a magic bullet. Consider the following as well: http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/3651-Theo-de-Raadt-about-virtualisation.html http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/3651-Theo-de-Raadt-about-vi... I really don't want this solution.

mike-cardwell 14y ago
I will reserve judgement until I've given it a try. It might not be the ideal solution, but it looks like a nice stop-gap solution.
tjoff 14y ago
I really like the idea and I just can't wait for it to be more prevalent on mobile devices. I'm sick of the lack of control over my data I have on android (not to mention iOS).
- eckyptang 14y ago
  This is not a flame or a troll, but seriously try Windows Phone. It actually gets this spot on.
  - glhaynes 14y ago
    Can you say anything more about this or provide a link? I'm not familiar with this aspect of Windows Phone.
    - eckyptang 14y ago
      Every interaction that it makes to the network is controllable via user preferences and is documented. It does not send data unless you allow it to. Each application is fully isolated from others so applications cannot read from each other by design as well. Nice video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzviQLCPCG4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzviQLCPCG4 An application can read the unique ID of the device (which is used for session persistence between service calls) but not access any other information unless allowed to. Effectively there is no way for it to steal all the data in that list unless you physically tell it that it's ok to do it. It's the mobile platform that scares the shit out of me the least. They did good here.
      - glhaynes 14y ago
        Thanks. That video seems to only show settings/confirmation-prompts for the usage of location data, but if you can control whether individual apps have access to the network, too, that's handy.

mike-cardwell 14y ago

I will reserve judgement until I've given it a try. It might not be the ideal solution, but it looks like a nice stop-gap solution.

tjoff 14y ago

I really like the idea and I just can't wait for it to be more prevalent on mobile devices. I'm sick of the lack of control over my data I have on android (not to mention iOS).

eckyptang 14y ago
This is not a flame or a troll, but seriously try Windows Phone. It actually gets this spot on.
- glhaynes 14y ago
  Can you say anything more about this or provide a link? I'm not familiar with this aspect of Windows Phone.
  - eckyptang 14y ago
    Every interaction that it makes to the network is controllable via user preferences and is documented. It does not send data unless you allow it to. Each application is fully isolated from others so applications cannot read from each other by design as well. Nice video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzviQLCPCG4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzviQLCPCG4 An application can read the unique ID of the device (which is used for session persistence between service calls) but not access any other information unless allowed to. Effectively there is no way for it to steal all the data in that list unless you physically tell it that it's ok to do it. It's the mobile platform that scares the shit out of me the least. They did good here.
    - glhaynes 14y ago
      Thanks. That video seems to only show settings/confirmation-prompts for the usage of location data, but if you can control whether individual apps have access to the network, too, that's handy.