Bibliography
653
control scheme can be incorporated in a programming language that supports
abstract data types. The use of minimal operating-system support to enforce
protection was advocated by the Exokernel Project ([Ganger et al. (2002)],
[Kaashoek et al. (1997)]). Extensibility of system code through language-based
protection mechanisms was discussed in [Bershad et al. (1995)]. Other tech-
niques for enforcing protection include sandboxing ([Goldberg et al. (1996)])
and software fault isolation ([Wahbe et al. (1993)]). The issues of lowering the
overhead associated with protection costs and enabling user-level access to
networking devices were discussed in [McCanne and Jacobson (1993)] and
[Basu et al. (1995)].
More detailed analyses of stack inspection, including comparisons with
other approaches to Java security, can be found in [Wallach et al. (1997)] and
[Gong et al. (1997)].
Bibliography
[Basu et al. (1995)]
A. Basu, V. Buch, W. Vogels, and T. von Eicken, “U-Net:
A User-Level Network Interface for Parallel and Distributed Computing”,
Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles
(1995).
[Bershad et al. (1995)]
B. N. Bershad, S. Savage, P. Pardyak, E. G. Sirer,
M. Fiuczynski, D. Becker, S. Eggers, and C. Chambers, “Extensibility, Safety and
Performance in the SPIN Operating System”, Proceedings of the ACM Symposium
on Operating Systems Principles
(1995), pages 267–284.
[Cohen and Jefferson (1975)]
E. S. Cohen and D. Jefferson, “Protection in the
Hydra Operating System”, Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Operating
Systems Principles
(1975), pages 141–160.
[Dennis and Horn (1966)]
J. B. Dennis and E. C. V. Horn, “Programming Seman-
tics for Multiprogrammed Computations”, Communications of the ACM, Volume
9, Number 3 (1966), pages 143–155.
Chia sẻ với bạn bè của bạn: |
