Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Kaspersky OS

eugene.kaspersky.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 290 posts

Re: Kaspersky OS

#31

Post by minipci1321 »

pawadu wrote: post #22
krylon wrote: post #13

It sounds very interesting, for sure, but the announcement is a little thin on details. The OS is apparently based around a microkernel. Which sounds good, but AFAIK, microkernels are comparatively popular in the embedded space (think QNX, L4) - so that choice is not in itself revolutionary. They mention signatures, and it kind of sounds as if the OS will refuse to execute any non-signed code. Again, sounds like a go…

L4 is popular in embedded space? Can you provide some examples?

Not sure if the parent meant this specifically, but the commercial version of L4 was ported to ARM to host Android, and was then used in some commercial phones -- deployed in millions says Internet: http://linuxfr.org/nodes/88229/comments/1291183

Re: Kaspersky OS

#32

Post by jeffjose »

akourman wrote: post #30

I think after Microsoft is part of Linux foundation now, and now your telling us that you have a powerful and secure CLOSE source OS !!! .. I think Open Source already won the war!! and your somewhat 14 years late...

I'm reall

Re: Kaspersky OS

#33

Post by krylon »

metafex wrote: post #14

> All the popular operating systems aren’t designed with security in mind Kaspy OS runs on a switch, and they're talking about popular operating systems, so in the same vein, OpenBSD wouldn't be a popular secure OS for e.g. routers? But hey, I'd be really happy if they based it on seL4 and formally verified their security concepts. That would be a real game-changer. OTOH I'm really sceptical until they provide any re…

Also, in a microkernel-based system, verifying the kernel itself is but a start.

To make a verifiably secure system for network infrastructure and IoT-devices, you need, at the very least, a provably correct IP stack. Want a nice web interface? Now you need to verify the HTTP server, too. Want to talk to other devices? You probably want a DNS resolver. And so forth...

Simply signing code and having the OS refuse to execute code without valid signatures is not going to be sufficient to convince a lot of people that it's a significant improvement security-wise.

(If, on the other hand, they make it open source and provide proofs of correctness for all these components, that would indeed be a significant step forward.)

Re: Kaspersky OS

#34

Post by minipci1321 »

alexandr451 wrote: post #9
mablap wrote: post #5

There are no real details about the OS in the article. Did anybody here work on the project?

From what I heard from people that work there, this company mistreats employees and has huge problems with management. I could provide a proof link, but it's in Russian.

It is preferable to even outright include the link in the original post when making that sort of statements.

Without specific details, it sounds pretty much like any random Glassdoor report from un unhappy employee.

Re: Kaspersky OS

#36

Post by SXX »

johndoe90 wrote: post #18

Given that there's not only software bugs, but the hardware ones, I wonder how secure it would be. I personally hate their software, but still, it would be nice to know. P.S. Security without open-sourcing is impossible. Although, dunno how for other countries, but here in Russia some people have a different point of view. Some people believe that “opensource is insecure by design, because everyone can see the code”.…

Kaspersky is too smart to have such point, but their target markets might require different marketing.

Re: Kaspersky OS

#37

Post by aerioux »

qznc wrote: post #6

No mention of verification like seL4 or CertiKOS?

^ i'm interested in this as well. Would it be faster to build a secure OS using similar tech from seL4/CertiKOS now than their 14 yrs?

Re: Kaspersky OS

#38

Post by minipci1321 »

qznc wrote: post #6

No mention of verification like seL4 or CertiKOS?

I understand CertiKOS used Coq so the verification was at least half-automated? How L4 was certified -- what were the tools available at the time? Verification still remains huge work but sounds less heroic nowadays.

Now that we have tools and methodologies for verification, the announce of yet another secure OS suddenly sounds much less impressive.

Re: Kaspersky OS

#39

Post by krylon »

pawadu wrote: post #22
krylon wrote: post #13

It sounds very interesting, for sure, but the announcement is a little thin on details. The OS is apparently based around a microkernel. Which sounds good, but AFAIK, microkernels are comparatively popular in the embedded space (think QNX, L4) - so that choice is not in itself revolutionary. They mention signatures, and it kind of sounds as if the OS will refuse to execute any non-signed code. Again, sounds like a go…

L4 is popular in embedded space? Can you provide some examples?

Wikipedia says: "L4 is widely deployed. One variant, OKL4 from Open Kernel Labs, shipped in billions of mobile devices.", links to a press announcement: https://web.archive.org/web/20120211210405/http://www.ok-lab...

Okay, if I look more closely, OKL4 seems to be used as a hypervisor to host regular kernels. I am not sure how much that buys one, really, from a security point of view.

Also, the same Wikipedia article states: "Apple mobile application processors beginning with the A7 contain a Secure Enclave coprocessor running an L4 operating system. This implies that L4 is now shipping on all iOS devices, the total shipment of which is estimated at 310 million for the year 2015."

Re: Kaspersky OS

#40

Post by qznc »

pawadu wrote: post #22
krylon wrote: post #13

It sounds very interesting, for sure, but the announcement is a little thin on details. The OS is apparently based around a microkernel. Which sounds good, but AFAIK, microkernels are comparatively popular in the embedded space (think QNX, L4) - so that choice is not in itself revolutionary. They mention signatures, and it kind of sounds as if the OS will refuse to execute any non-signed code. Again, sounds like a go…

L4 is popular in embedded space? Can you provide some examples?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L4_microkernel_family#Commerci...

> OKL4 shipments exceeded 1.5 billion in early 2012, mostly on Qualcomm wireless modem chips. Other deployments include automotive infotainment systems.

> Apple mobile application processors beginning with the A7 contain a Secure Enclave coprocessor running an L4 operating system. This implies that L4 is now shipping on all iOS devices, the total shipment of which is estimated at 310 million for the year 2015.

Post reply on HN