[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: On the nature of trust


I found your short argument good reading and I am generally in agreement.

I believe, however, that much argument may follow simply from the choice
of the term "trust".  In common english usage, the term most often signifies
"that which one does not know, but is 'banking on'" as in "I trust that the
U.S. government will not fall tomorrow morning, the sun will come up, etc."
One almost universally says "I trust ..." to things one cannot actually know
with certainty at the time (else one would say "I know ...").

In contrast, your use of the term refers, loosely speaking, to that which
one already knows (no possible surprise, risk, etc.)  If I were to take your
document and globally replace the term "trust" with "knowledge" then I am
certain that few if any could find a point of argument.

Beyond this, your point that, in essence, trust (knowledge) is the medium,
not the message, is an insightful and useful point of view.  However, when
virtual machines, pipes and their data are both software, it will be an
uphill battle to keep this border distinct.  Perhaps that is your point.


Tony Bartoletti                                             LL
SPI-NET GURU                                             LL LL
Computer Security Technology Center                   LL LL LL
Lawrence Livermore National Lab                       LL LL LL
PO Box 808, L - 303                                   LL LL LLLLLLLL
Livermore, CA 94551-9900                              LL LLLLLLLL
email: azb@llnl.gov   phone: 510-422-3881             LLLLLLLL