<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hacker News: cosmicriver</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=cosmicriver</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 May 2026 08:10:39 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=cosmicriver" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by cosmicriver in "The foundations of a provably secure operating system (PSOS) (1979) [pdf]"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I am also surprised that capabilities weren't more widely implemented after mobile OSes demonstrated they are practical. I know Windows made a move in that direction with UAC but had to soften it due to user alert fatigue. So I guess having no legacy apps and a centralized repository helps.<p>I've recently been looking into Guix SD as a solution. Its package management is designed to keep programs independent of each other, so containers are cheap and lightweight. Trying out untrusted software is as easy as `guix shell --container --pure --no-cwd [program]`, which blocks access to the network, file system, and environment variables. Right now I'm adding more advanced capability management: limits on CPU, memory, storage space, network use, etc.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2026 12:26:58 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48178760</link><dc:creator>cosmicriver</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48178760</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48178760</guid></item></channel></rss>