3 ms·
That's so wrong, putting more and more stuff into the kernel and expanding attack surface. How long will it take before someone finds a vulnerability in QUIC ha
by codedokode 1y ago
That's so wrong, putting more and more stuff into the kernel and expanding attack surface. How long will it take before someone finds a vulnerability in QUIC handling?
The kernel should be as minimal as possible and everything that can be moved to userspace should be moved there. If you are afraid of performance issues then maybe you should stop using legacy processors with slow context switch timing.
- NewJazz 1y agoUse a microkernel if this is your strong opinion. Linux is a monolithic kernel and includes a whole lot in kernel space for the sake of performance and (as mentioned in the article) hardware integration. A well designed microkernel may be able to provide similar performance with better security, but until people put serious work in, it won't be competitive with Linux.
- codedokode 1y agoSadly Linux distributions use large kernel and there is no simple way to get a working desktop system with a microkernel.
- surajrmal 1y agoUnfortunately the os community puts 99% of it'st collective energy into Linux. There is definitely pent up demand for a different architecture. China seems to be innovating here, but it's unclear if the west will get anything out of their designs.
- sevg 1y ago> If you are afraid of performance issues then maybe you should stop using legacy processors with slow context switch timing. By the same logic, we should never improve performance in software and just tell everyone to buy new hardware instead. A bit ridiculous.
- codedokode 1y agoWe should not compromise security for minor improvements in performance.