oops, I forgot the link to the paper: look at page 4.
https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/atc15/atc15-paper-minnich.pdf
Nik
Am Montag, 30. Oktober 2017 schrieb Dr. Nikolaus Klepp:
> Am Montag, 30. Oktober 2017 schrieb Didier Kryn:
> > Le 30/10/2017 à 08:44, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp a écrit :
> > > Am Montag, 30. Oktober 2017 schrieb J. Fahrner:
> > >> https://osseu17.sched.com/event/ByYt/replace-your-exploit-ridden-firmware-with-linux-ronald-minnich-google
> > > Nice. But it they suffer from the "not invented here"-syndrome: instead of using prooven good busysbox, they rewrite userspace in GO .. oops, who "invented" Go and wants to push it to the users?
> > >
> >
> > Nik, Though I agree that Busybox is proven good, it remains that
> > the said system is more than an OS and is to run at least one
> > application on top of Busybox. This application must be written in some
> > language.
> > Busybox provides interpreted languages, Ash, Hush and Awk, but I
> > doubt they would be a good choice for a complex application. The
> > application should rather be written in some compiled language and one
> > cannot deny the author the choice of this language, provided it is open
> > source. You know what my preferred language would be, but, from what
> > I've briefly read about Go, it seems to be based on not so bad rationale.
>
> Hi Didier,
>
> please look at the presentation, 2. slide: it says "This is to a shell prompt in Linux" and "All userland written in Go", so it's not about any application "on top of this written in go", but plain busybox rewritten in Go.
>
> Nik
>
>
>
--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA, CIA ...
::
Re: [DNG] Google abandons UEFI in C…
