Time Stamping a Program in Ada-95

Time Stamping a Program in Ada-95

[Austin Obyrne]

Time Stamping a Program in Ada-95 

If I ‘compile to listing’ using the “Run – Compile to Listing” facility in Ada-95 I can get a time stamp declaration of the day and exact time instant of that compiling that is very useful in a court of law later as documentary evidence but if I subsequently compile as usual later on i.e. just by clicking on the ‘compile’ button in the toolbar of my editor it overwrites that earlier time stamp – I think.

Lemme explain a bit better.  When I complete a piece of development work that evolves as a piece of software I will want to secure the copyright.  Although there are many ways of doing this the way I favour most is the intrinsic time stamp method i.e. if I compile to listing I will get a print-out of the compiler number and the exact time and day on which it was last compiled.  This is powerful evidence of copyright.

This is only useful however if it has not been accidentally overwritten later by another compile-to-listing operation by the same compiler or by a copy of that compiler.

I want to try and prevent that happening accidentally. 

Does anybody know more about this – is it possible to do both without losing the time stamp facility i.e. compile to listing and ordinary periodic compiling from the tool bar also?

If this is not possible to prevent it should be brought to the notice of the powers that be in Ada as a useful security function going begging ??

Your help would be appreciated as usual.

- adacrypt

Re: Time Stamping a Program in Ada-95

[Austin Obyrne]

On Thursday, September 13, 2012 6:11:49 PM UTC+1, Austin Obyrne wrote:
> Time Stamping a Program in Ada-95 If I ‘compile to listing’ using the “Run – Compile to Listing” facility in Ada-95 I can get a time stamp declaration of the day and exact time instant of that compiling that is very useful in a court of law later as documentary evidence but if I subsequently compile as usual later on i.e. just by clicking on the ‘compile’ button in the toolbar of my editor it overwrites that earlier time stamp – I think. Lemme explain a bit better. When I complete a piece of development work that evolves as a piece of software I will want to secure the copyright. Although there are many ways of doing this the way I favour most is the intrinsic time stamp method i.e. if I compile to listing I will get a print-out of the compiler number and the exact time and day on which it was last compiled. This is powerful evidence of copyright. This is only useful however if it has not been accidentally overwritten later by another compile-to-listing operation by the same compiler or by a copy of that compiler. I want to try and prevent that happening accidentally. Does anybody know more about this – is it possible to do both without losing the time stamp facility i.e. compile to listing and ordinary periodic compiling from the tool bar also? If this is not possible to prevent it should be brought to the notice of the powers that be in Ada as a useful security function going begging ?? Your help would be appreciated as usual. - adacrypt

Just occurred to me -it isn't necesary to take any steps to prevent this happening if I make a hard copy of the original first-time compile-to-listing time stamp ??? - 

That would give me irrefutable copyright evidence surely ?

I would still appreciate your views. - adacrypt

Re: Time Stamping a Program in Ada-95

[Simon Wright]

Austin Obyrne <austin.obyrne@hotmail.com> writes:

> On Thursday, September 13, 2012 6:11:49 PM UTC+1, Austin Obyrne wrote:
>> Time Stamping a Program in Ada-95 If I ‘compile to listing’ using
>> the “Run – Compile to Listing” facility in Ada-95 I can get a time
>> stamp declaration of the day and exact time instant of that
>> compiling that is very useful in a court of law later as documentary
>> evidence but if I subsequently compile as usual later on i.e. just
>> by clicking on the ‘compile’ button in the toolbar of my editor it
>> overwrites that earlier time stamp – I think. Lemme explain a bit
>> better. When I complete a piece of development work that evolves as
>> a piece of software I will want to secure the copyright. Although
>> there are many ways of doing this the way I favour most is the
>> intrinsic time stamp method i.e. if I compile to listing I will get
>> a print-out of the compiler number and the exact time and day on
>> which it was last compiled. This is powerful evidence of
>> copyright. This is only useful however if it has not been
>> accidentally overwritten later by another compile-to-listing
>> operation by the same compiler or by a copy of that compiler. I want
>> to try and prevent that happening accidentally. Does anybody know
>> more about this – is it possible to do both without losing the time
>> stamp facility i.e. compile to listing and ordinary periodic
>> compiling from the tool bar also? If this is not possible to prevent
>> it should be brought to the notice of the powers that be in Ada as a
>> useful security function going begging ?? Your help would be
>> appreciated as usual. - adacrypt
>
> Just occurred to me -it isn't necesary to take any steps to prevent
> this happening if I make a hard copy of the original first-time
> compile-to-listing time stamp ??? -
>
> That would give me irrefutable copyright evidence surely ?
>
> I would still appreciate your views. - adacrypt

A computer-generated timestamp could easily be faked.

I would have thought you could fall back on sending a printout to
yourself through the mail and leaving the envelope sealed on receipt.

But IANAL.

Re: Time Stamping a Program in Ada-95

[Ludovic Brenta]

Austin Obyrne writes:
> Time Stamping a Program in Ada-95 
>
> If I ‘compile to listing’ using the “Run – Compile to Listing”
> facility in Ada-95

Ada 95 has no such facility; you must be talking about one particular
implementation (i.e. compiler and presumably IDE) of Ada 95.

> I can get a time stamp declaration of the day and exact time instant
> of that compiling that is very useful in a court of law later as
> documentary evidence but if I subsequently compile as usual later on
> i.e. just by clicking on the ‘compile’ button in the toolbar of my
> editor it overwrites that earlier time stamp – I think.

Since you're a serious cryptologist, you must know how easy it is to
fake a timestamp.  Many 13-year-old attackers can edit the binary file
emitted by your compiler and change the timestamp, replace your name
from the copyright notice, insert a rootkit in your executable and take
control of your computer from their bedroom.  Unless, of course, you
take the precaution of digitally signing your executables, exerting
proper access control and checking the signature every time you change
them (i.e. by running Debian :) ).

> Lemme explain a bit better.  When I complete a piece of development
> work that evolves as a piece of software I will want to secure the
> copyright.  Although there are many ways of doing this the way I
> favour most is the intrinsic time stamp method i.e. if I compile to
> listing I will get a print-out of the compiler number and the exact
> time and day on which it was last compiled.  This is powerful evidence
> of copyright.

No.  The proper way is to write your precious copyrighted work on a
CD-ROM and ask a notary or bailiff to keep it in a safe.  It is their
job to testify in court what day you provided your CD-ROM.

> I want to try and prevent that happening accidentally. 

No.  You want to prevent that happening because a malicious attacker
makes a conscious effort to steal your copyrighted work, and has
knowledge and means to that end.  Much more difficult.  As for
accidental changes, just make your executables read-only or use a
copy-on-write filesystem, or use a proper version control system.

> Does anybody know more about this – is it possible to do both without
> losing the time stamp facility i.e. compile to listing and ordinary
> periodic compiling from the tool bar also?

Sure, I do it all the time.  I use monotone and I sign my Debian
packages with a trusted GPG key.

> If this is not possible to prevent it should be brought to the notice
> of the powers that be in Ada as a useful security function going
> begging ??

It is possible.  With or without Ada or any compiler.  What I said
applies also to plain text files containing poetry, if you want.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.

Re: Time Stamping a Program in Ada-95

[Austin Obyrne]

On Thursday, September 13, 2012 8:56:57 PM UTC+1, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> Austin Obyrne writes: > Time Stamping a Program in Ada-95 > > If I ‘compile to listing’ using the “Run – Compile to Listing” > facility in Ada-95 Ada 95 has no such facility; you must be talking about one particular implementation (i.e. compiler and presumably IDE) of Ada 95. > I can get a time stamp declaration of the day and exact time instant > of that compiling that is very useful in a court of law later as > documentary evidence but if I subsequently compile as usual later on > i.e. just by clicking on the ‘compile’ button in the toolbar of my > editor it overwrites that earlier time stamp – I think. Since you're a serious cryptologist, you must know how easy it is to fake a timestamp. Many 13-year-old attackers can edit the binary file emitted by your compiler and change the timestamp, replace your name from the copyright notice, insert a rootkit in your executable and take control of your computer from their bedroom. Unless, of course, you take the precaution of digitally signing your executables, exerting proper access control and checking the signature every time you change them (i.e. by running Debian :) ). > Lemme explain a bit better. When I complete a piece of development > work that evolves as a piece of software I will want to secure the > copyright. Although there are many ways of doing this the way I > favour most is the intrinsic time stamp method i.e. if I compile to > listing I will get a print-out of the compiler number and the exact > time and day on which it was last compiled. This is powerful evidence > of copyright. No. The proper way is to write your precious copyrighted work on a CD-ROM and ask a notary or bailiff to keep it in a safe. It is their job to testify in court what day you provided your CD-ROM. > I want to try and prevent that happening accidentally. No. You want to prevent that happening because a malicious attacker makes a conscious effort to steal your copyrighted work, and has knowledge and means to that end. Much more difficult. As for accidental changes, just make your executables read-only or use a copy-on-write filesystem, or use a proper version control system. > Does anybody know more about this – is it possible to do both without > losing the time stamp facility i.e. compile to listing and ordinary > periodic compiling from the tool bar also? Sure, I do it all the time. I use monotone and I sign my Debian packages with a trusted GPG key. > If this is not possible to prevent it should be brought to the notice > of the powers that be in Ada as a useful security function going > begging ?? It is possible. With or without Ada or any compiler. What I said applies also to plain text files containing poetry, if you want. -- Ludovic Brenta.

Many thanks for your advice.  I'm surprised that this might be an attribute of just one particlar editor and not a general thing in many editors. 

In passing, this has no security function - it is just a case of belt and braces proof of the origin of the source code.

In practice I would probably post a copy to myself with recorded delivery and not open it when I receive it back.

Thanks - adacrypt

Re: Time Stamping a Program in Ada-95

[Anonymous]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1584 bytes --]

Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> wrote:

> > If I ‘compile to listing’ using the “Run – Compile to Listing”
> > facility in Ada-95
> 
> Ada 95 has no such facility; you must be talking about one particular
> implementation (i.e. compiler and presumably IDE) of Ada 95.

No, he's a known crank. see sci.crypt and then add him to your killfile

> Since you're a serious cryptologist

It's quite serious, but he's no cryptologist. He's a hapless crank, idiot,
and bullshitter. 

>, you must know how easy it is to fake a timestamp.

He knows nothing, and nothing of the kind

For anyone else who's reading this thread, the way timestamps are handled
today is via a trusted third party. They stamp and digitally sign your file
and then you have something that can stand up in court, unlike Ada Cripple's
anything.

> Sure, I do it all the time.  I use monotone and I sign my Debian
> packages with a trusted GPG key.

This doesn't guarantee the time stamp. You can always set your clock to
whatever you like before you sign. 

> > If this is not possible to prevent it should be brought to the notice
> > of the powers that be in Ada as a useful security function going
> > begging ??

No, it's something that real cryptographers and serious consumers of
cryptographic services already know how to deal with. There's infrastructure
set up for this already.

You, crank, are an idiot.

> It is possible.  With or without Ada or any compiler.  What I said
> applies also to plain text files containing poetry, if you want.

Yes it does. But he can't write anything.

Re: Time Stamping a Program in Ada-95

[tmoran]

>In practice I would probably post a copy to myself with recorded delivery
>and not open it when I receive it back.

  Why not just mail it instead to the US Copyright office and register it?

Re: Time Stamping a Program in Ada-95

[Austin Obyrne]

On Friday, September 14, 2012 5:34:43 PM UTC+1, (unknown) wrote:
> >In practice I would probably post a copy to myself with recorded delivery >and not open it when I receive it back. Why not just mail it instead to the US Copyright office and register it?

I don't have any problem getting this copyright recorded by various public means - I have already recorded it at the US Library of Congress - Washington.

I am more interested in establishing the scope of this time stamp facility in the editor that comes with my older version of Ada compiler - Gnat 311.p.  This to my mind is a very useful attribute that is indelible proof of the origin of the source code.

There is no security role being claimed here either.

I just thought readers might have something to add to what I said earlier about it being a useful attribute of my editor.  Is it widely known and common to many other editors is what I would like to know.

- adacrypt

Re: Time Stamping a Program in Ada-95

[Fritz Wuehler]

On 2012-09-13, Austin Obyrne <austin.obyrne@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Time Stamping a Program in Ada-95
>
> I can get a time stamp declaration of the day and exact time instant
> of that compiling that is very useful in a court of law later as
> documentary evidence...I will want to secure the copyright.

Forget about compiling.  Just timestamp the source code, and use a
digital notary to do it.  Sign your code (using GPG or the like), and
then email it to post@stamper.itconsult.co.uk, and make this first
line in the body of your message:

  x-stamper-to: austin.obyrne@hotmail.com

The contents of the email will be cryptographically signed by a third
party attesting that the content existed at that point in time.  The
message you send will be hashed with whatever message preceeded yours
(or its hash), (thus limiting the possibility that the third party
could signficantly fabricate the timestamp).  You'll get a certificate
number which can be used to later locate the records if needed.

IIRC, the maintainer (Matthew Richardson) has appeared in court to
validate timestamps.  Perhaps only British courts.. not sure on that.

This service is unofficial AFAIK, but would still be difficult to
dispute the evidence.