Overall description is engagingly rich but the discussion of internals is evasive. Having in mind the stunning revelations about intellectual freedom in America that emerged from the experiences undergone by programming gurus like Phil Zimmerman and John Gilmore, I asked Gary McGraw about the team's tantalizingly vague literary treatment of a computer science topic. We published full details of security holes in 1996, yet there has never been an attack applet in the wild. We didn't provide exploit scripts, just described it so you can understand it, so that people in the know with hands-on experience mucking around this stuff can learn how to write protectively, yet so the lazy can't make an exploit script. The market is ripe for snake oil.
People treat security as an add-on feature.
The research community took that as a challenge. But Java is by far and away the most reasonable approach to attempting to secure mobile code. I was under the false hope in 1995 that Java would be better than it is. Coauthor Ed Felten is known to the general public as the expert witness for the U.S. Department of Justice who, in the Microsoft antitrust trial, noticed the discrepancy in the video because he wrote the program to remove IE from Win95. Perhaps one needs experience studying the chess literature to assess Securing Java .