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=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
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: 2001-08-02 09:05:05 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!oleane.net!oleane!nnrp.oleane.net!not-for-mail
From: Reivilo Snuved <odevuns@iname.JUNK.com>
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.
Followup-To: comp.lang.ada
Date: 02 Aug 2001 18:02:15 +0200
Organization: In Reverse
Sender: devuns@buzet
Message-ID: <st66c68n7c.fsf@aonix.fr>
References: <bebbba07.0107292308.d1192fc@posting.google.com>
 <9k9if8$rn3$1@elf.eng.bsdi.com> <GHEt6A.BzD@approve.se>
 <3B687EDF.9359F3FC@mediaone.net> <GHFDJp.G7q@approve.se>
 <3B694F80.C7C2D013@mediaone.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: gauntlet-fr.aonix.fr
X-Trace: s1.read.news.oleane.net 996768148 20580 62.161.92.253 (2 Aug 2001
 16:02:28 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@oleane.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:02:28 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11095 comp.lang.c:71670
 comp.lang.c++:79364 comp.lang.functional:7193
Date: 2001-08-02T18:02:15+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Ed Falis <efalis@mediaone.net> writes:

> Goran Larsson wrote:
> > 
> > In article <3B687EDF.9359F3FC@mediaone.net>,
> > Ed Falis  <efalis@mediaone.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > Read the report.
> > 
> > I have. Your point is?
> > 
> > --
> > G�ran Larsson     Senior Systems Analyst    hoh AT approve DOT se
> 
> It was about inappropriately reused code.  I suppose that does bolster
> some of the arguments about poor programming, though the error in this
> case was due to decisions pretty far upstream from the code.
> 
> - Ed

Wasn't there, also,  a program management decision  NOT to perform a
(arguably long/costly) integrated test, which would have revealed the error ?
 - it did indeed, when it was performed ... after the flight. 

-- 
Olivier Devuns                         | Aonix: http://www.aonix.com