[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: future of bytecode verifier
- From: Dirk Feytons <dirk.feytons@...>
- Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 09:39:25 +0100
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:50 PM, Ralph Hempel
> If you cannot guarantee that the verifier works in
> all cases, then I agree that having it gives a false sense
> of security.
> As I'm very interested in reducing the size of my firmware
> image, what function names are affected?
I'm interested as well.
Lhf, you mentioned the cost of the verifier; do you have any concrete numbers?
Could the current verifier be transformed to a lua_Reader example that
is distributed separately in ./etc (like all.c/min.c/noparser.c)?