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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,TO_NO_BRKTS_FROM_MSSP 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: 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 07:33:36 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!feed.textport.net!newsranger.com!www.newsranger.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.functional From: Ted Dennison 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$1@bird.wu-wien.ac.at> Subject: Re: How Ada could have prevented the Red Code distributed denial of service attack. Message-ID: X-Abuse-Info: When contacting newsranger.com regarding abuse please X-Abuse-Info: forward the entire news article including headers or X-Abuse-Info: else we will not be able to process your request X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsranger.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:33:16 EDT Organization: http://www.newsranger.com Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:33:16 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:12234 comp.lang.c:76117 comp.lang.c++:84828 comp.lang.functional:7623 Date: 2001-08-22T14:33:16+00:00 List-Id: In article <9m0193$grs$1@bird.wu-wien.ac.at>, Markus Mottl says... > >In comp.lang.functional Joachim Durchholz wrote: >> Could you share a reference to a report? >As usual, official reports (i.e. by the Navy itself) that indicate >shortcomings of their weapon technology do not circulate for too long >for obvious reasons (but maybe they are just hidden well enough). Well, I should point out that this isn't really "weapons technology". Its just the engine control systems. The weapons are controlled by completely different systems. > >There are plenty of serious media that report on the case, e.g. Government >Computing News: > > http://www.gcn.com/archives/gcn/1998/december14/39.htm > http://www.gcn.com/vol18_no36/com/903-1.html I used to work at a place that was the competitor to the company that supplied this system. I could add a lot of semi-insider elaboration to all this, but that's probably best done in private (perhaps over a beer or two). If Jerry Petrey's reading, he may have more info on this than I do. This is actually a bit *worse* than it may sound to a civilian. I understand that for a Navy captain, having to be towed in to port is a rough equivalent in embarassment to being publicly gelded and then paraded through town. We would occasionally have engineers *flown*out* to ships to aviod this... We offered a system using technology hand-picked for reliability. Our legacy stuff was all CMS-2, but for new work we bid Unix and Ada. We once even tried out NT, and it was purposely put on a non-critical redundant device, to aviod the possiblity of it causing a failure all by itself. Our competitor got themselves a R&D contract, and proceeded to use the most buzzword-compliant technologies they could find (at the time, NT and C++, with some AI thrown in for good measure). They then tried to leverage their R&D work into actual production for new ships, with the brass that was in charge of the R&D work championing them. What you read above is the result. --- T.E.D. homepage - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com