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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no 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: 103376,bc1361a952ec75ca X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,582dff0b3f065a52 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,582dff0b3f065a52 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-02 07:32:11 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!psinet-eu-nl!psiuk-p4!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" 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: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 10:12:42 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: <9kbn4t$n4a$1@nh.pace.co.uk> References: <3B6555ED.9B0B0420@sneakemail.com> <87n15lxzzv.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <3B672322.B5EA1B66@home.com> <3B683D3C.860BAE0A@silver.jhuapl.edu> <65bd5935.0108020356.16c61e15@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 136.170.200.133 X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 996761565 23690 136.170.200.133 (2 Aug 2001 14:12:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Aug 2001 14:12:45 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11084 comp.lang.c:71644 comp.lang.c++:79331 comp.lang.functional:7184 Date: 2001-08-02T14:12:45+00:00 List-Id: That's a little unfair. I don't think anyone was ever claiming that usage of Ada or any other language was ever going to stop you from producing code that had errors in it. The original idea was that languages exist (of which Ada is one) that perform compile time and runtime checks that reduce or eliminate whole classes of errors and that this is a good and desirable thing. Evidence exists to indicate that stronger, more robust, more reliable, more secure systems tend to get built if compilers check for common, everyday programming errors and eliminate them. Nobody ever said you can't build reliable software in languages that *don't* perform these sorts of checks, but it isn't a stretch to claim that the level of effort is going to be higher and the probability of success lower. Hence, the case is being made that perhaps developers should consider safety and security concerns when selecting a language for implementation. That hardly seems like some wild-eyed claim that using Ada (or whatever language du jour you like) is going to prevent programmers from building things that fail. MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com Web: http://www.mcondic.com/ "Beelsebob" wrote in message news:65bd5935.0108020356.16c61e15@posting.google.com... > [origional message] > > So your point is that you can use a buggy microsoft implementation of > C++ to write a virus. > > Now then let me see... oh yes, you can use Ada (not even a buggy > implementation of it) to cause the Arian 5 rocket to try and turn > round in mid flight, and disintegrate into many tinny little burrning > pieces.....