From: reinkor <reinkor@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Substrings as argument to procedures/functions
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 04:43:15 -0700 (PDT)
Date: 2016-04-13T04:43:15-07:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9c28eac4-8edf-45dc-afcd-082abfd4cf4b@googlegroups.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <nel697$ua5$1@dont-email.me>
On Wednesday, April 13, 2016 at 12:19:28 PM UTC+2, Brian Drummond wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 21:44:01 -0700, reinkor wrote:
>
> > Yes, I may somehow have confused index and position.
> > However, there may be some security/paranoia reasons to minimize the
> > information handed over to a subroutine?
>
> Rather the reverse.
>
> It's the absence of such information - and its consequences - that makes
> buffer overflow attacks possible.
>
> -- Brian
I have no strong opinion, but just trying arguments:
If a complex subroutine is made by a subcontract (in the country far far away),
then it is in general a point to provide only the necessary information
to make the subroutine? I mean, if paranoia is in charge ? :-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-13 11:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-12 8:25 Substrings as argument to procedures/functions reinkor
2016-04-12 9:01 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2016-04-12 16:55 ` reinkor
2016-04-12 18:37 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2016-04-13 4:44 ` reinkor
2016-04-13 7:19 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2016-04-13 10:16 ` Brian Drummond
2016-04-13 11:43 ` reinkor [this message]
2016-04-13 11:54 ` Pascal Obry
2016-04-13 12:30 ` Mart van de Wege
2016-04-13 12:47 ` Egil H H
2016-04-13 13:19 ` Mart van de Wege
2016-04-13 16:57 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2016-04-12 18:17 ` Robert A Duff
2016-04-12 18:34 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2016-04-13 21:29 ` Randy Brukardt
2016-04-25 15:33 ` rieachus
2016-04-25 22:07 ` Randy Brukardt
2016-04-26 6:12 ` Georg Bauhaus
2016-04-26 18:41 ` Randy Brukardt
2016-04-13 11:22 ` G.B.
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox