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: 103376,bc1361a952ec75ca X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,582dff0b3f065a52 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-22 13:29:47 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!nautilus.eusc.inter.net!newsfeed.Austria.EU.net!newsfeed.kpnqwest.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 20:29:45 +0000 (UTC) Organization: University of Economics and Business Administration, Vienna, Austria Message-ID: <9m14np$rcs$1@bird.wu-wien.ac.at> References: <87n15lxzzv.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <3B672322.B5EA1B66@home.com> <4a885870.0108112341.7ce02ac0@posting.google.com> <3B834E5D.B0D26AB1@adaworks.com> <9lvsic$bet9s$1@ID-9852.news.dfncis.de> <0sDnZRVkz5qL@eisner.encompasserve.org> <3b83847d.1117251944@news.worldonline.nl> <9m07uk$jn0$1@bird.wu-wien.ac.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: miss.wu-wien.ac.at X-Trace: bird.wu-wien.ac.at 998512185 28060 137.208.107.17 (22 Aug 2001 20:29:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news-admin@wu-wien.ac.at NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:29:45 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-981225 ("Volcane") (UNIX) (OSF1/V4.0 (alpha)) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:12289 comp.lang.c:76224 comp.lang.c++:84938 comp.lang.functional:7633 Date: 2001-08-22T20:29:45+00:00 List-Id: In comp.lang.functional Ted Dennison wrote: > In article <9m07uk$jn0$1@bird.wu-wien.ac.at>, Markus Mottl says... >>I'd suggest that a new ABM-treaty be written, which allows the US to >>build ABMs against the former agreements, but requires them to let these >>missiles be controlled by Windows CE. I'd feel much safer this way... ;) > Actually, to be safe under that system, you'd have to make sure *you* are the > country antagonizing the US, and *not* one of their neighbors... Well, currently it seems the US is not particularly interested in improving foreign relations to _any_ country. Showing intentions to break the ABM-treaty doesn't make nor keep friends... Regards, Markus Mottl -- Markus Mottl, mottl@miss.wu-wien.ac.at, http://miss.wu-wien.ac.at/~mottl