Re: Advantage of XML based GUI? (was Re: Ada-inspired OS/Language)

["Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" <ve3wwg@cogeco.ca>]

Nick Roberts wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 08:24:44 +0000 (UTC), Preben Randhol
> <randhol+news@pvv.org> strongly typed:
>>On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 01:53:42 GMT, Nick Roberts wrote:
...
>>So if somebody runs a program that contains a virus of some kind he will
>>not deleting the hard disc for example? The reason for my question was
>>that one can in Linux choose to login as root all the time when one has
>>ones own machine, but this is utterly stupid. The reason is that if you
>>run a rouge program it will have access to all the disc and can do
>>anything as it would be run under superuser priveliges. Therefore one
>>makes a normal user and uses this all the time and only use the
>>superuser when one need to install software. In Windows they put the
>>superuser priveliges on one of the users... That's why I'm asking.
> 
> In simple terms, we will take steps to ensure that this sort of this cannot
> happen in standard AdaOS installations.
> 
> For example, when a program is downloaded from the Internet and executed,
> it will be executed with an 'authority' that is very limited (certainly
> disallowing reformatting the hard disk ;-)  If that program tries to access
> an object it (it's authority) does not have permission to access, the user
> will be asked whether to grant that access; the user can say "yes" (in
> which case the permission is effectively added to the authority) or "no".
> Objects will have security 'groups', to make this process a little less
> laborious.

This doesn't always work out well with the "user". This is the same problem
with the McAfee Firewall software. They start with the premise of locking
everything down (which is good) and then asking questions of the user
as they progress through their normal tasks.

The problem with this model is that the end user
does'nt understand the questions! If the user is presented with a prompt
to allow/disallow TCP port 23 incoming access, he is stuck. The user becomes
impatient and will then:

   1) Allow the access to see if it will accomplish his task (but here he
      has no clue as to how to undo this later)
   2) Disallow any access he doesn't understand because he is paranoid, and
      as a result may not accomplish what he wants to do.
   3) Or answer a combination of 1 & 2 depending upon whether it "sounds
      dangerous" or not.
   4) Do nothing without help, because he is paralyzed with fear.

For McAffee Firewall, it would be better for a knowledgeable friend to set
it up ahead of time so that the end user does not have to decide (at least
it should have that option).

In an operating system situation, I'm not sure if asking the user is the
right thing to do. A knowledgable person should establish the run-time
criteria ahead of time, IMHO.  You don't want end users having to decide
"programming" decisions. The end users don't want that responsibility either.

-- 
Warren W. Gay VE3WWG
http://home.cogeco.ca/~ve3wwg