Tradeoffs in retrofitting security

Subscribe (Full Service)


	Search: The ACM Digital Library The Guide

	Feedback

Tradeoffs in retrofitting security: an experience report

Full text

Pdf (127 KB)

Source

Dynamic Languages Symposium archive
Proceedings of the 2007 symposium on Dynamic languages table of contents

Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Pages: 1 - 1

Year of Publication: 2007

ISBN:978-1-59593-868-8

Author

Mark Samuel Miller

Google Inc., Mountain View, CA

Sponsors

SIGPLAN: ACM Special Interest Group on Programming Languages
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery

Publisher

ACM New York, NY, USA

Bibliometrics

Downloads (6 Weeks): 0, Downloads (12 Months): 32, Citation Count: 0

Additional Information:

abstract index terms collaborative colleagues

Tools and Actions:	Review this Article Save this Article to a Binder Display Formats: BibTeX EndNote ACM Ref

DOI Bookmark:	Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1297081.1297082 What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

In 1973, John Reynold's and James Morris' Gedanken language retrofit object-capability security into an Algol-like base. Today, there are active projects retrofitting Java, Javascript, Python, Mozart/Oz, OCaml, Perl, and Pict. These represent a variety of approaches, with different tradeoffs regarding legacy compatibility, safety, and expressivity. In this talk I propose a taxonomy of these approaches, and discuss some of the lessons learned to date.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
D. Software
D.3 PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES
D.3.2 Language Classifications
Subjects: Object-oriented languages