The flattening star *@array seems to give basically the same behavior as an real array parameter dereference in perl5, gobbling every other parameter to the end. OTOH, making an array parameter require a actual array is an improvement, I guess, because at least there is now a way to pass scalar after array without having it be gobbled up by the array.
For me tho, I guess I'll stick with array reference arguments, anyways. Probably still cheaper and faster. I wonder also if what Damian says is true:
In other words, a @ parameter in Perl 6 is like a \@ context specifier in Perl 5..
I suspect that passing an actual array is still "by value". Seems like alot of work to avoid confusion that is not really very confusing.
Somehow, I doubt this. If any "user" requests an certificate, and does it correctly, then there's only one key, and one password. Thats the way X.509 works best.
As an American living in Europe, I have found that in some cases, they are even more finatical about email privacy (in the corporate world, anyways) than we are. In Norway, for example, former employees cannot have their mail read, even after they leave the company. (I feel relatively certain that Germany has the same, although I do not think that this is an EU rule)
Give the government strong crypto controled by a single trusted admin.
The point of public key X.509 systems, is that everyone is the admin of their own key. And only that key. Not even the admin knows what the private key is, unless it is an intentionally shared private key.
One of the tactics of the black hats seems to be to dig around for information from places, and perhaps in ways, which might not be quite so easy for them to get access to, when the white hats learn to use encryption as well as "they" do.
For example, consider mining an airline booking site to see which flights have special prices. This type of information retrieval might become better protected, because such information could lead to speculation about the human-density on the flight.
Consider also, that Europe, as Us, is devastated by every new MS worm that comes around. But if they'd only use SSL server encryption more widely, they'd be unbothered by such simple virusen. Managers will buy more servers, because SSL takes more horsies, (as every other form of encryption), users will share information in a more sensible way, the economy will rebound, etc., etc..:)
I contend that the most interesting authorities built out of X.509, in any case objCA, sslCA, and objsign (from openssl docs and Netscape definitions), should continue to be widely encouraged. emailCA, perhaps is for the more mature organization, but an organizations email can sometimes be the biggest "hole" of all. It should be closed-up, in any good business activity, anywhere, eventually.
The point is, everyones already got this stuff. The playing field is even, and we have to fight dishonesty with the same tools as are being used to hide it.
Not to worry unless someone tells you to put your certificate on your head or your hand (right). Right?
I am just as irritated as any other parent with Barney, but the kids like him. Thats a fact. I dunno why. (Has anyone done a frame-by-frame search of a program for subliminal messages?:-)
Anyhow, this pisses me off. I've tried desparately to think of any excuse to tell the kids, "No, you can't watch Barney today.", but now Barneys lawyers have finally given me something close to legitimate.
"Sorry son, he's not very nice in person."
Can you imagine if Mr. Rogers would have pursued everyone who made fun of him? No. He may have had some funny parodies, but it was always about the children, and nothing else.
Barney tapes (not to mention other paraphanalia) are off of my shopping list for good.
If I could be guaranteed that my data is stored encrypted with my own public key, and delivered only encrypted with public keys which I personally trust (like my doctors key), then I might not have such a bit problem with this.
A requestor could prompt me for my private key to decrypt and deliver my data via sWAP, if they are in a big hurry. Otherwise, I'll approve your data request next time I login.
Slashdot Mirror
For me tho, I guess I'll stick with array reference arguments, anyways. Probably still cheaper and faster. I wonder also if what Damian says is true:
In other words, a @ parameter in Perl 6 is like a \@ context specifier in Perl 5. .
I suspect that passing an actual array is still "by value". Seems like alot of work to avoid confusion that is not really very confusing.
Somehow, I doubt this. If any "user" requests an certificate, and does it correctly, then there's only one key, and one password. Thats the way X.509 works best.
As an American living in Europe, I have found that in some cases, they are even more finatical about email privacy (in the corporate world, anyways) than we are. In Norway, for example, former employees cannot have their mail read, even after they leave the company. (I feel relatively certain that Germany has the same, although I do not think that this is an EU rule)
Give the government strong crypto controled by a single trusted admin.
The point of public key X.509 systems, is that everyone is the admin of their own key. And only that key. Not even the admin knows what the private key is, unless it is an intentionally shared private key.
One of the tactics of the black hats seems to be to dig around for information from places, and perhaps in ways, which might not be quite so easy for them to get access to, when the white hats learn to use encryption as well as "they" do.
For example, consider mining an airline booking site to see which flights have special prices. This type of information retrieval might become better protected, because such information could lead to speculation about the human-density on the flight.
Consider also, that Europe, as Us, is devastated by every new MS worm that comes around. But if they'd only use SSL server encryption more widely, they'd be unbothered by such simple virusen. Managers will buy more servers, because SSL takes more horsies, (as every other form of encryption), users will share information in a more sensible way, the economy will rebound, etc., etc.. :)
I contend that the most interesting authorities built out of X.509, in any case objCA, sslCA, and objsign (from openssl docs and Netscape definitions), should continue to be widely encouraged. emailCA, perhaps is for the more mature organization, but an organizations email can sometimes be the biggest "hole" of all. It should be closed-up, in any good business activity, anywhere, eventually.
The point is, everyones already got this stuff. The playing field is even, and we have to fight dishonesty with the same tools as are being used to hide it.
Not to worry unless someone tells you to put your certificate on your head or your hand (right). Right?
I am just as irritated as any other parent with Barney, but the kids like him. Thats a fact. I dunno why. (Has anyone done a frame-by-frame search of a program for subliminal messages? :-)
Anyhow, this pisses me off. I've tried desparately to think of any excuse to tell the kids, "No, you can't watch Barney today.", but now Barneys lawyers have finally given me something close to legitimate.
"Sorry son, he's not very nice in person."
Can you imagine if Mr. Rogers would have pursued everyone who made fun of him? No. He may have had some funny parodies, but it was always about the children, and nothing else.
Barney tapes (not to mention other paraphanalia) are off of my shopping list for good.
Bill
A requestor could prompt me for my private key to decrypt and deliver my data via sWAP, if they are in a big hurry. Otherwise, I'll approve your data request next time I login.