From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5bc4be576204aa20
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Harald Korneliussen" <vintermann@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Buffer overflow Article - CACM
Date: 29 Nov 2005 00:16:04 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1133252164.539307.165050@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
References: <uYzdf.18228$Zv5.14884@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>
   <IpQdf.1206$s14.1071@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>
   <3tr6hiFu7jr6U1@individual.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 158.38.140.179
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1133252169 2869 127.0.0.1 (29 Nov 2005 08:16:09
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 08:16:09 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
 rv:1.7.6) Gecko/20050317 Firefox/1.0.7,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=158.38.140.179;
   posting-account=5vUApw0AAADF5Kx_4-L9ZPdL9lZywYoQ
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6662
Date: 2005-11-29T00:16:04-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Peter Amey wrote:
> OF course, using SPARK, we can statically prove the absence of buffer
> overflows (and many other potential exploits) and thus add precisely
> nothing in the form of a run-time overhead!
>
> Peter

I though that with SPARK, you have to write your program with no moving
parts (or dynamic data structures) and then supply a suite of proofs,
which may be quite hard, even with the assistant? How often is this
practical?