UniParser 0.1 released.

UniParser 0.1 released.

[Victor Porton]

UniParser 0.1alpha released by Extreme Code Software.
Alpha - unknown bugs are possible, API may change.

See http://ex-code.com/uniparser/ . Also 
(devel page) http://sf.net/projects/uniparser/ .
"Buy" link and the mailing list do not yet work today.

It is a very flexible, powerful and extensible Ada library for
creating grammar parsers and lexers. Works not only with streams
of ASCII characters but with any data streams (e.g. Unicode).
See http://sf.net/projects/uniparser/ for more benefits.

API documentation included.

Released under both GPL-2 and a commercial license. There is also a 
tutorial (also as the library itself preliminary, tell me if you
don't understand something in the tutorial please), see the Web site
for conditions to get the tutorial.

If you buy the commercial version among other benefits you receive 
gratis updates (of both the library and tutorial) for 4 years and
technical support.

Please test it and put info about it on the Ada Web sites.

I'm also interested in receiving parser examples (written with 
UniParser) and whether it is enough fast for you.

Deficiency: the source code of parser is bigger than for most
other parser toolkits. Maybe will be created a metalanguage
over Ada to get over this problem.

I like to hear any comments (in c.l.a or by e-mail).

Re: UniParser 0.1 released.

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <E18sPsl-0003MI-00@porton.narod.ru>, porton@ex-code.com (Victor Porton) writes:
> UniParser 0.1alpha released by Extreme Code Software.
> Alpha - unknown bugs are possible, API may change.
> 
> See http://ex-code.com/uniparser/ . Also 
> (devel page) http://sf.net/projects/uniparser/ .

> I like to hear any comments (in c.l.a or by e-mail).

I don't see any indication regarding buying this on physical media.

Re: UniParser 0.1 released.

[Victor Porton]

In article <At42tLB25j0M@eisner.encompasserve.org>,
	Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:
> In article <E18sPsl-0003MI-00@porton.narod.ru>, porton@ex-code.com (Victor Porton) writes:
>> UniParser 0.1alpha released by Extreme Code Software.
>> Alpha - unknown bugs are possible, API may change.
>> 
>> See http://ex-code.com/uniparser/ . Also 
>> (devel page) http://sf.net/projects/uniparser/ .
> 
>> I like to hear any comments (in c.l.a or by e-mail).
> 
> I don't see any indication regarding buying this on physical media.

OK, I can add in the near days. BTW, Why you want namely CD?

Re: UniParser 0.1 released.

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <E18sSIU-00040M-00@porton.narod.ru>, porton@ex-code.com (Victor Porton) writes:
> In article <At42tLB25j0M@eisner.encompasserve.org>,
> 	Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:

>> I don't see any indication regarding buying this on physical media.
> 
> OK, I can add in the near days. BTW, Why you want namely CD?

I see two possible interpretations of that question:

What do you want, CD ?

	Yes, ISO 9660 would be good.

Why do you want physical media ?

	Security policies that forbid copying software over the Internet.

Security

[Victor Porton]

In article <HN+$5lQxL8E6@eisner.encompasserve.org>,
	Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:
> In article <E18sSIU-00040M-00@porton.narod.ru>, porton@ex-code.com (Victor Porton) writes:
>> In article <At42tLB25j0M@eisner.encompasserve.org>,
>> 	Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:
> 
> Why do you want physical media ?
> 
> 	Security policies that forbid copying software over the Internet.

If I will sign by 2048 bit GnuPG key is it a replacement for physical 
media? (Well, except of transferring the key itself. However if I'll 
upload it to central keyservers and sign with it my further messages 
here, is it OK? I'm not against making a CD, just ask.)

P.S. As we posters in c.l.a deal with security so much, shouldn't we
introduce the "spoken rule" to digitally sign messages? Maybe we
should have our own keyserver at a place like AdaPower?

Re: Security

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <E18sSch-0004Iv-00@porton.narod.ru>, porton@ex-code.com (Victor Porton) writes:
> In article <HN+$5lQxL8E6@eisner.encompasserve.org>,
> 	Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:

>> Why do you want physical media ?
>> 
>> 	Security policies that forbid copying software over the Internet.
> 
> If I will sign by 2048 bit GnuPG key is it a replacement for physical 
> media? (Well, except of transferring the key itself. However if I'll 
> upload it to central keyservers and sign with it my further messages 
> here, is it OK? I'm not against making a CD, just ask.)

I don't understand how that avoids copying software over the Internet.
It seems to be aimed more at proposing a different policy than complying
with the existing policy.

> P.S. As we posters in c.l.a deal with security so much, shouldn't we
> introduce the "spoken rule" to digitally sign messages? Maybe we
> should have our own keyserver at a place like AdaPower?

Perhaps those of you who use PGP should.

Re: Security

[Preben Randhol]

Larry Kilgallen wrote:
> In article <E18sSch-0004Iv-00@porton.narod.ru>, porton@ex-code.com (Victor Porton) writes:
>> P.S. As we posters in c.l.a deal with security so much, shouldn't we
>> introduce the "spoken rule" to digitally sign messages? Maybe we
>> should have our own keyserver at a place like AdaPower?
> 
> Perhaps those of you who use PGP should.

Signing messages has little to do with security. It only deals with
authenticity.

-- 
  ()   Join the worldwide campaign to protect fundamental human rights.
 +||-.
.+--+'
'+||-                                           http://www.amnesty.org/

Re: Security

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <slrnb6r7e2.1fn.randhol+news@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>, Preben Randhol <randhol+news@pvv.org> writes:
> Larry Kilgallen wrote:
>> In article <E18sSch-0004Iv-00@porton.narod.ru>, porton@ex-code.com (Victor Porton) writes:
>>> P.S. As we posters in c.l.a deal with security so much, shouldn't we
>>> introduce the "spoken rule" to digitally sign messages? Maybe we
>>> should have our own keyserver at a place like AdaPower?
>> 
>> Perhaps those of you who use PGP should.
> 
> Signing messages has little to do with security. It only deals with
> authenticity.

My training has been to associate security with the initials C.I.A.,
standing for the words:

	Confidentiality
	Integrity
	Availability

And I would count Authenticity as part of Integrity.

Re: Security

[Preben Randhol]

Larry Kilgallen wrote:
> My training has been to associate security with the initials C.I.A.,
> standing for the words:
> 
> 	Confidentiality
> 	Integrity
> 	Availability
> 
> And I would count Authenticity as part of Integrity.

Yes, but if you cannot download software (source that is, I'm not
talking about binary executables) then how can you download pgp-keys
from the net?

-- 
  ()   Join the worldwide campaign to protect fundamental human rights.
 +||-.
.+--+'
'+||-                                           http://www.amnesty.org/

Re: Security

[Victor Porton]

In article <slrnb6rkeb.8lc.randhol+news@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>,
	Preben Randhol <randhol+news@pvv.org> writes:
> Yes, but if you cannot download software (source that is, I'm not
> talking about binary executables) then how can you download pgp-keys
> from the net?

Using pgp/gpg keys would be able to eliminate the need for physical 
media for every new update of software. It would be enough to only once 
send the key on floppy/CD and then using this key to send authentied 
software through Internet.

Re: Security

[Preben Randhol]

Victor Porton wrote:
> Using pgp/gpg keys would be able to eliminate the need for physical 
> media for every new update of software. It would be enough to only once 
> send the key on floppy/CD and then using this key to send authentied 
> software through Internet.

Yes, to some extent. However things can be forged. Although signing is
done by f.ex RedHat and Microsoft.  However with security there is only
one rule: Nothing is secure. :-)

-- 
  ()   Join the worldwide campaign to protect fundamental human rights.
 +||-.
.+--+'
'+||-                                           http://www.amnesty.org/

Re: Security

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <slrnb6rkeb.8lc.randhol+news@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>, Preben Randhol <randhol+news@pvv.org> writes:
> Larry Kilgallen wrote:
>> My training has been to associate security with the initials C.I.A.,
>> standing for the words:
>> 
>> 	Confidentiality
>> 	Integrity
>> 	Availability
>> 
>> And I would count Authenticity as part of Integrity.
> 
> Yes, but if you cannot download software (source that is, I'm not
> talking about binary executables) then how can you download pgp-keys
> from the net?

You seem to be confusing multiple discussions that have a common root.

_I_ am not a PGP user.

Re: UniParser 0.1 released.

[Preben Randhol]

Larry Kilgallen wrote:
> 	Security policies that forbid copying software over the Internet.

But how do you know that the content on the CD is not a security risk?

-- 
  ()   Join the worldwide campaign to protect fundamental human rights.
 +||-.
.+--+'
'+||-                                           http://www.amnesty.org/

Re: UniParser 0.1 released.

[Marin David Condic]

These are the sorts of comments made by those who have not had to deal with
security people. :-) It doesn't matter that dangerous software could get
into the computers any number of ways besides the Internet. The security
bozos decided that the answer is "No" when it comes to downloading software
but "Yes" when its loaded from a CD. Hence, if Larry doesn't want to get
fired, he brings the software in on a CD. It doesn't have to make sense - it
Security. :-)

MDC
--
======================================================================
Marin David Condic
I work for: http://www.belcan.com/
My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/

Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ a c m . o r g

    "Going cold turkey isn't as delicious as it sounds."
        -- H. Simpson
======================================================================

Preben Randhol <randhol+news@pvv.org> wrote in message
news:slrnb6r7fe.1fn.randhol+news@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no...
> Larry Kilgallen wrote:
> > Security policies that forbid copying software over the Internet.
>
> But how do you know that the content on the CD is not a security risk?
>
> --
>   ()   Join the worldwide campaign to protect fundamental human rights.
>  +||-.
> .+--+'
> '+||-                                           http://www.amnesty.org/

Re: UniParser 0.1 released.

[Preben Randhol]

Marin David Condic wrote:
> These are the sorts of comments made by those who have not had to deal with
> security people. :-) It doesn't matter that dangerous software could get
> into the computers any number of ways besides the Internet. The security
> bozos decided that the answer is "No" when it comes to downloading software
> but "Yes" when its loaded from a CD. Hence, if Larry doesn't want to get
> fired, he brings the software in on a CD. It doesn't have to make sense - it
> Security. :-)

Hmm, wonder if they accept discs as well?

So it is like the economist that think they can blame Microsoft if Word
crashes because they *bought* it from a company. (Of course they can
blame, but it won't make a difference when it comes to liability as
Microsoft software is just as : USE AT OWN RISK as open source software)

-- 
  ()   Join the worldwide campaign to protect fundamental human rights.
 +||-.
.+--+'
'+||-                                           http://www.amnesty.org/

Re: UniParser 0.1 released.

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <slrnb6r7fe.1fn.randhol+news@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>, Preben Randhol <randhol+news@pvv.org> writes:
> Larry Kilgallen wrote:
>> 	Security policies that forbid copying software over the Internet.
> 
> But how do you know that the content on the CD is not a security risk?

The point I raised was whether a prospective vendor is capable of dealing
with an existing security policy.  It was not an effort to redesign that
policy.  There may be other aspects of the policy of which you are not aware.

Re: UniParser 0.1 released.

[Preben Randhol]

Larry Kilgallen wrote:
> The point I raised was whether a prospective vendor is capable of dealing
> with an existing security policy.  It was not an effort to redesign that
> policy.  There may be other aspects of the policy of which you are not aware.

But a disc will suffice?

-- 
  ()   Join the worldwide campaign to protect fundamental human rights.
 +||-.
.+--+'
'+||-                                           http://www.amnesty.org/

Re: UniParser 0.1 released.

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <slrnb6rk8m.8lc.randhol+news@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>, Preben Randhol <randhol+news@pvv.org> writes:
> Larry Kilgallen wrote:
>> The point I raised was whether a prospective vendor is capable of dealing
>> with an existing security policy.  It was not an effort to redesign that
>> policy.  There may be other aspects of the policy of which you are not aware.
> 
> But a disc will suffice?

A disc (or tape) is a requirement.  That does not mean it is the only
requirement.  Again, the purpose of my inquiry was with regard to
an existing security policy, not to redesign that policy.

Re: UniParser 0.1 released.

[Georg Bauhaus]

Victor Porton <porton@ex-code.com> wrote:
: Released under both GPL-2 and a commercial license.

"Note that it is licensed under GPL-2 so that you have no right
to use it in software for-sale."

Not true.

: If you buy the commercial version among other benefits you receive 
: gratis updates (of both the library and tutorial) for 4 years and
: technical support.

As an aside, a quote from the referenced GPL:
"You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy,
and you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee."
 
(I'm not criticising your use of two licenses, but really,
you _should_ get in touch with a laywer, in particular if
you expect to have customers in the USA.)

Re: UniParser 0.1 released.

[Preben Randhol]

Georg Bauhaus wrote:
> Victor Porton <porton@ex-code.com> wrote:
>: Released under both GPL-2 and a commercial license.
> 
> "Note that it is licensed under GPL-2 so that you have no right
> to use it in software for-sale."
> 
> Not true.
> 
>: If you buy the commercial version among other benefits you receive 
>: gratis updates (of both the library and tutorial) for 4 years and
>: technical support.
> 
> As an aside, a quote from the referenced GPL:
> "You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy,
> and you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee."
>  
> (I'm not criticising your use of two licenses, but really,
> you _should_ get in touch with a laywer, in particular if
> you expect to have customers in the USA.)

I think he wants to have a GPL version so that everybody who wants to
use this in software for free have to use the GPL license too. However
if you want to make commercial software you can buy the library under
the commercial license and thereby you can choose your license for your
product.

Btw if one use GPL libraries in a program it can still be released under
GMGPL, right?

-- 
  ()   Join the worldwide campaign to protect fundamental human rights.
 +||-.
.+--+'
'+||-                                           http://www.amnesty.org/

Mixing GPL and GMGPL (Was: UniParser 0.1 released.)

[Jacob Sparre Andersen]

Preben Randhol wrote:

> Btw if one use GPL libraries in a program it can still be released under
> GMGPL, right?

Since GPL and GMGPL - as far as I understand it - only differ in the 
case of libraries and not in the case of programs, you might be able to 
do it, but I suspect that there may be some wierd details that can get 
you in trouble.

I think it is safer to use GPL in such a case.

Since GMGPL is comes with fewer restrictions than GPL, you should in 
general avoid GMGPL'ing code that uses GPL'ed code.

I am unsure of how GMGPL and LGPL relates, but I have a feeling that 
GMGPL also has fewer restrictions than LGPL.

Greetings,

Jacob

PS: If you are really serious about this, you should pay your lawyer a
     lot of money to tell you that he/she is not quite sure about this
     either.
-- 
"Any, sufficiently complicated, experiment is indistinguishable from
  magic."

Re: Mixing GPL and GMGPL (Was: UniParser 0.1 released.)

[Stephen Leake]

Jacob Sparre Andersen <sparre@crs4.it> writes:

> PS: If you are really serious about this, you should pay your lawyer a
>      lot of money to tell you that he/she is not quite sure about this
>      either.

Better yet, find a good lawyer that does understand this.

It really isn't that complicated; any competent lawyer should be able
to handle it!

-- 
-- Stephe

Re: Mixing GPL and GMGPL (Was: UniParser 0.1 released.)

[Samuel Tardieu]

>>>>> "Stephen" == Stephen Leake <Stephen.A.Leake@nasa.gov> writes:

Stephen> It really isn't that complicated; any competent lawyer should
Stephen> be able to handle it!

I've seen competent lawyer say the GPL will stand in court, and
competent lawyer say it won't. A competent lawyer doesn't tell the
law, it only interprets it with more knowledge and experience than the
rest of the population.

  Sam
-- 
Samuel Tardieu -- sam@rfc1149.net -- http://www.rfc1149.net/sam

Re: UniParser 0.1 released.

[Stephen Leake]

Preben Randhol <randhol+news@pvv.org> writes:

> Btw if one use GPL libraries in a program it can still be released under
> GMGPL, right?

No. That's precisely the point of the GMGPL; it allows ACT to release
libraries that can be used in a non-GPL program. GPL libraries cannot
be used in a non-GPL program.

As everyone is saying, these are legal issues, and you need to consult
a legal expert (that's not me).

-- 
-- Stephe

Security

[Frank Cheung]

Hello!

I have written a program in Ada83, and would like to provide some security
features to it:

(1) the user should not be able to exit using ctrl-d, ctrl-z, etc.
(2) password access to enter and exit the program.

Are there any routines or packages available to do this?  Thank you very
much in advance.

Regards,
Frank.

  ________________Frank Cheung | Computer Science (BSc) Year 2_______________
 /   fktc101@york.ac.uk | 0881-800800 a/c 841276 | +44-1904-430000 ext 4250  \
|James College, University of York, Heslington, Y01 5DD, York, United Kingdom|

Re: Security

[Theodore E. Dennison]

Frank Cheung wrote:
> 
> I have written a program in Ada83, and would like to provide some security
> features to it:
> 
> (1) the user should not be able to exit using ctrl-d, ctrl-z, etc.
> (2) password access to enter and exit the program.
> 
> Are there any routines or packages available to do this?  Thank you very
> much in advance.
> 

In Ada? No. Bundled with your compiler? Probably.



-- 
T.E.D.          
                |  Work - mailto:dennison@escmail.orl.mmc.com  |
                |  Home - mailto:dennison@iag.net              |
                |  URL  - http://www.iag.net/~dennison         |

Re: Security

[Wayne Lawton]

Theodore E. Dennison wrote:
> 
> Frank Cheung wrote:
> >
> > I have written a program in Ada83, and would like to provide some security
> > features to it:
> >
> > (1) the user should not be able to exit using ctrl-d, ctrl-z, etc.
> > (2) password access to enter and exit the program.
> >
> > Are there any routines or packages available to do this?  Thank you very
> > much in advance.
> >
> 
> In Ada? No. Bundled with your compiler? Probably.
> 

Actually, there is such a package.  I wrote a security package a few 
years ago for an Army system called MPMIS.  I have since been told that 
a version of the package found its way into the Army Reuse Center 
repository.

If that version isn't right, you may take a look at an Air Force system 
called the Combat Ammunition System (CAS).

I would recommend the CAS version as being the more mature.  

The algorithm uses a database to pass "I called/I was called by" 
information between modules in the system.  The package supports 
multi-level security based on the UNIX model.  That is users and groups 
of users have no access, read access, or execute access to a particular 
module in the system.  The package does require a database to support 
the tables.  The package supports encryption of the userids and 
passwords.

The package has been implemented in a multiple executable environment, 
as well as a multi-thread cooperative processing environment.

Hope one of these pointers helps...

Wayne Lawton
WLawton@servtech.com

security

[Steve Vestal]

I would appreciate receiving pointers to any (proposed) standards, surveys, or
"typical" requirements for security in embedded systems.  I'm not talking
about Orange book type stuff, but rather about compartmentalized or red/black
security requirements that might be imposed on embedded systems.  Thanks in
advance.

Steve Vestal
Mail: Honeywell S&RC MN65-2100, 3660 Technology Drive, Minneapolis MN 55418 
Phone: (612) 782-7049                    Internet: vestal@src.honeywell.com