Talk:Protecting Memory Secrets: Difference between revisions
In what sense?
EnigmaticC (talk | contribs) m (→Disagree, Task is valid: adjust points) |
(In what sense?) |
||
Line 65:
[[User:EnigmaticC|EnigmaticC]] ([[User talk:EnigmaticC|talk]]) 01:44, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
:Valid as a useful concept for some contexts, definitely. But is it valid as a *rosettacode* task? If so, how?
:Also, some questions:
::First, what is a secret? Is it a bit pattern or is it the information represented by that bit pattern? (A bit pattern is much easier to deal with, in a concrete sense, than an abstraction is.)
::Second, what does it mean to erase a secret? Specifically: how much responsibility must the software author have over the underlying hardware and operating system? (For example: if the operating system has swap enabled, or preserves memory images in some other fashion, is that an issue for the language or is that out of scope for this task?)
::Third is there some meaningful "minimum size" for consideration here? Short bit patterns can happen coincidentally so are probably not relevant, correct?
:Philosophically speaking, all secret knowledge is temporary -- either all holders of the secret expire, losing the knowledge, or the information is eventually propagated or re-discovered rendering it non-secret. Here, we're aiming for partial expiration -- partial because of limitations of software scope. But we still need to define that scope.
:Anyways... it seems to me that adequately addressing this task takes us deep into rosettacode's "[[Rosetta_Code:Add_a_Task#Things_to_avoid|things to avoid]]" territory. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 05:28, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
| |||