From: "David Chizmadia" <>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 16:29:38 -0500
Subject: Re: [e-lang] "Capability Myths Demolished" (was: Software secur ity workshop)


    If, by some chance,  you could write it by 18 December - and especially
if you could tie it into WOMP as a more effective and assured approach to
distributed object security - I can offer the Distributed Objects and
Components Security (DOCSec) workshop as a venue for presentation and both
paper and web publication. tyler

    I'd also like to extend the same invitation to everyone on this list! 
We've extended our submission deadline from 4 November to 18 December and
would welcome any contributions that extend or demonstrate the theory and
practice of DOCSec. Contributions can take the form of a full (5-8 page)
paper; an abstract for a work-in-progress, product or system, research or
development effort; a tutorial; or a panel. The workshop itself will be in
Baltimore, MD from 7-10 April 2003. Accepted papers will be published in
the April 2003 issue of Information Security Bulletin. The papers, along
with any presentation slides from the workshop, will also be archived (by
early May) on a permanent DOCSec 2003 web page hosted by the OMG.

    You can find more details about the workshop at URL 

David Chizmadia 
DOCSec 2003 General Co-Chair

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tyler Close" <> 
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 3:41 PM
Subject: Re: [e-lang] "Capability Myths Demolished" (was: Software secur
ity workshop)

> On Thursday 05 December 2002 16:03, you wrote:
> > Tyler Close wrote:
> > > Given that there has been 30 years of "bogosity" surrounding
> > > capabilities, it is likely necessary that every paper that is
> > > actually about capabilities contain a footnote about the Lampson
> > > error. This should be sufficient to avoid confusion, without the
> > > need to invent a history.
> >
> > I claim to be the first to follow Tyler's excellent suggestion.  IEEE
> > Software sent me the galley proofs for my split capabilities paper right in
> > the middle of this flurry of emails on the subject.  The paper describes
> > the access matrix (which I think I transposed) and the row/column
> > compression.  I got the editor to let me insert the sentence "Despite the
> > apparent symmetry, ACLs are not equivalent to CLs." with a reference to
> > "Demolished".  That's the best I could do so late in the process.
> Wow, the scientific process in action right before our very eyes.
> This is great.
> > Tyler, you need to write your paper on the subject, so we have a solid
> > piece of work to cite.
> Thank you for the encouragement. I will write a paper. I am not
> sure what to do with it, but I'll write it.
> Tyler
> _______________________________________________
> e-lang mailing list

e-lang mailing list