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: 1014db,582dff0b3f065a52 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,bc1361a952ec75ca X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,582dff0b3f065a52 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-22 05:47:32 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newscore.univie.ac.at!aconews.univie.ac.at!newsfeed.wu-wien.ac.at!not-for-mail From: Markus Mottl 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: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:47:30 +0000 (UTC) Organization: University of Economics and Business Administration, Vienna, Austria Message-ID: <9m09l2$jn0$3@bird.wu-wien.ac.at> References: <3B6555ED.9B0B0420@sneakemail.com> <87n15lxzzv.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <3B672322.B5EA1B66@home.com> <4a885870.0108112341.7ce02ac0@posting.google.com> <3B834E5D.B0D26AB1@adaworks.com> <9lvsic$bet9s$1@ID-9852.news.dfncis.de> <9m0193$grs$1@bird.wu-wien.ac.at> <9m08tm$bsbo3$1@ID-9852.news.dfncis.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: miss.wu-wien.ac.at X-Trace: bird.wu-wien.ac.at 998484450 20192 137.208.107.17 (22 Aug 2001 12:47:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news-admin@wu-wien.ac.at NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:47:30 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-981225 ("Volcane") (UNIX) (OSF1/V4.0 (alpha)) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:12219 comp.lang.c:76097 comp.lang.c++:84808 comp.lang.functional:7617 Date: 2001-08-22T12:47:30+00:00 List-Id: In comp.lang.functional Joachim Durchholz wrote: > Hmm. Looks as if NT wasn't really responsible, the thing was still > under test. It is true that the weapons control software was under test, but the same was _not_ true for the NT-server as such. A server that controls the network of a whole battle cruiser just must not go down due to some fault in an application. Several sources cite navy engineers who are extremely discontent about NT being used instead of Unix. Sure, no OS gives you 100% guarantees, but it's common knowledge among sysadmins that NT is significantly less stable than high-end Unix systems. I am not speaking of Linux here, which is not (yet) high-end in several critical aspects, but many people would still prefer it over NT. Regards, Markus Mottl -- Markus Mottl, mottl@miss.wu-wien.ac.at, http://miss.wu-wien.ac.at/~mottl