[Info-vax] CLI editing, was: Re: VMS - Virtual Terminals - A security risk way back yonder OR was that an Old Wives Tale ?

[Stephen Hoffman]

On 2016-02-13 22:28:09 +0000, David Froble said:

> To be a bit fair, there have been numerous methods for connecting 
> terminals to VAX systems.  I omit mentioning Alpha and IA64 because by 
> the time they came out most terminal access was LAT or TelNet or other 
> network connections.
> 
> RS232
> Current loop
> LAT
> TCP/IP
> 
> and perhaps more.
> 
> So yeah, it's understandable that terminal driver has been set up to 
> handle lots of different connection methods.
> 
> I'm going to guess that any serial lines still in use would not be for 
> terminals, but other devices.  But what do I know?
> 
> With VMS in a server mode, the existing stuff works for me.


Open your white wall to the Book of I/O Abuse, and partake of the 
elegant and simple programming interface, with nary a hint of arcana 
nor complexity present anywhere in the design.

Do recall that this trivial I/O processing happens entirely in a device 
driver and more than a little at IPL context, and of course marvel at 
the classic décclassé-and-port-whine driver organization.

But compatibility means that there's not a bit-bulldozer built nor a 
blockchain strong enough to drag the carcass of the terminal driver out 
to that giant excavation that's been dug out behind the woodshed.

To much is dependent on and inextricably tied into this mess.

But you're right, what's out there works for now, and there're a 
comparative dearth of engineering staffers to port and to overhaul and 
to update OpenVMS without taking on swamp-draining missions.

VSI may well decide to bury all of this OpenVMS stuff behind remote 
access and remote debuggers, behind TLS connections, and increasingly 
treat the operating system as an embedded solution.




-- 
Pure Personal Opinion | HoffmanLabs LLC