Hydra

Wulf, William A.; Cohen, Ellis S.; Corwin, William M.; Jones, Albert; Levin, Roy; Pierson, C.; Pollack, Fred J.

doi:10.1145/355616.364017

Cited by 367 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The object-capability paradigm, in the air by 1967 [Wilkes79,Fabry74], and well established by 1973 [Redell74,Hewitt73,Morris73,Wulf74,Wulf81], adds the observation that the abstraction mechanisms provided by the base model are not just for procedural, data, and control abstractions, but also for access abstractions, such as Redell's Caretaker. (These are "communications abstractions" in [Tribble95].…”

Section: Access Abstractionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Paradigm Regained: Abstraction Mechanisms for Access Control

Miller

Shapiro

2003

Advances in Computing Science – ASIAN 2003. Progamming Languages and Distributed Computation Programming Languages and Distribu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Access control systems must be evaluated in part on how well they enable one to distribute the access rights needed for cooperation, while simultaneously limiting the propagation of rights which would create vulnerabilities. Analysis to date implicitly assumes access is controlled only by manipulating a system's protection state-the arrangement of the access graph. Because of the limitations of this analysis, capability systems have been "proven" unable to enforce some basic policies: revocation, confinement, and the *-properties (explained in the text).In actual practice, programmers build access abstractions-programs that help control access, extending the kinds of access control that can be expressed. Working in Dennis and van Horn's original capability model, we show how abstractions were used in actual capability systems to enforce the above policies. These simple, often tractable programs limited the rights of arbitrarily complex, untrusted programs. When analysis includes the possibility of access abstractions, as it must, the original capability model is shown to be stronger than is commonly supposed.

show abstract

Section: Access Abstractionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Paradigm Regained: Abstraction Mechanisms for Access Control

Miller

Shapiro

2003

Advances in Computing Science – ASIAN 2003. Progamming Languages and Distributed Computation Programming Languages and Distribu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It started as a way to protect "primitive" resources such as memory segments [7], but was soon generalized [43] into a protected ability to invoke arbitrary services provided by other processes. For each process, there is a table associating small numbers (similar in spirit to Unix file descriptors) with the capabilities held by that process.…”

Section: Capability Operating Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Capability-Based Financial Instruments

Miller¹,

Morningstar²,

Frantz³

2001

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Every novel cooperative arrangement of mutually suspicious parties interacting electronically -every smart contract -effectively requires a new cryptographic protocol. However, if every new contract requires new cryptographic protocol design, our dreams of cryptographically enabled electronic commerce would be unreachable. Cryptographic protocol design is too hard and expensive, given our unlimited need for new contracts.Just as the digital logic gate abstraction allows digital circuit designers to create large analog circuits without doing analog circuit design, we present cryptographic capabilities as an abstraction allowing a similar economy of engineering effort in creating smart contracts. We explain the E system, which embodies these principles, and show a covered-call-option as a smart contract written in a simple security formalism independent of cryptography, but automatically implemented as a cryptographic protocol coordinating five mutually suspicious parties.

show abstract

“…It has sixteen PDPlTs connected through a crosspoint switch to a large shared memory. The operating system for C.mmp is called Hydra (Wulf et al, 1974). Because of the experimental nature of Hydra, it is possible for us to modify the lowest levels of it to help achieve our response goals and still live within a time-shared environment with access to the ARPA network.…”

Section: Rapid-response Large-network Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

ZOG: A Man-Machine Communication Philosophy,

Robertson¹,

Newell²,

Ramakrishna³

1977

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ZOG is a rapid response, large network, menu selection system used for manmachine communication. The philosophy behind this system was first developed by the PROMIS (Problem Oriented Medical Information System) Laboratory of the University of Vermont. ZOG will be used in a number of task domains to help explore and evaluate the limits and potential benefits of the communication philosophy. This paper discusses the basic ideas in ZOG and describes the architecture of a system that has just been implemented to carry out that exploration and evaluation.

show abstract

Hydra

Cited by 367 publications

References 7 publications

Paradigm Regained: Abstraction Mechanisms for Access Control

Paradigm Regained: Abstraction Mechanisms for Access Control

Capability-Based Financial Instruments

ZOG: A Man-Machine Communication Philosophy,

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About