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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 107f24,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid107f24,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,bc1361a952ec75ca
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-03 10:00:41 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: mjsilva@jps.net (Mike Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.functional
Subject: Re: How Ada could have prevented the Red Code distributed denial of
    service attack.
Date: 3 Aug 2001 10:00:41 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <5267be60.0108030900.26d4a4e7@posting.google.com>
References: <bebbba07.0107292308.d1192fc@posting.google.com>
 <slrn9mi1q3.7kb.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <GHGA3t.Izq@approve.se> <9kc355$ri0$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <GHGGJH.JpI@approve.se>
 <9kcdli$24o$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <stzo9h78kx.fsf@aonix.fr>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.239.204.168
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 996858041 1266 127.0.0.1 (3 Aug 2001 17:00:41 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 Aug 2001 17:00:41 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11234 comp.lang.c:71931
 comp.lang.c++:79717 comp.lang.functional:7263
Date: 2001-08-03T17:00:41+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Reivilo Snuved <odevuns@iname.JUNK.com> wrote in message news:<stzo9h78kx.fsf@aonix.fr>...
> "Marin David Condic" <marin.condic.auntie.spam@pacemicro.com> writes:
> 
> > In the second place the "Operand Error" they refer to is *not* a standard
> > Ada exception and I and others familiar with the report don't know where the
> > writers extracted this from. However, given the reference to a 64 bit Float
> > converting to a 16 bit integer and having some familiarity with the
> > Mil-Std-1750a microprocessor that was the target machine ...
> 
> Bzzt. The target machine for Ariane-5 was (and still is) a 68k-series.
> Operand Error referred to a FPU exception.

I've read a lot of speculation that the "Operand Error" in the report
was actually a CPU/FPU exception, but this is the most definitive
statement I've seen.  In this case it seems reasonable to imagine that
the same results would have occurred regardless of the programming
language used.

Mike