nanog mailing list archives
Re: Bell Labs or Microsoft security?
From: Florian Weimer <Weimer () CERT Uni-Stuttgart DE>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 23:18:51 +0100
Richard A Steenbergen <ras () e-gerbil net> writes:
I said exploits, not ways to get outside your proper address space and crash the OS. Any sufficiently powerful language presents an opportunity to do bad things to an ill prepared OS, but the answer isn't to make the language less powerful.
The Burroughs B6700 had trusted compilers.
Perhaps if we banned C and assembly, and made everyone use perl, we'd be safe. :)
The Perl parser itself (written in C ;) seems to have some issues (in __DIE__ handlers). 8-( -- Florian Weimer Weimer () CERT Uni-Stuttgart DE University of Stuttgart http://CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE/people/fw/ RUS-CERT fax +49-711-685-5898
Current thread:
- Re: What could have been done differently?, (continued)
- Re: What could have been done differently? just me (Jan 29)
- Re: What could have been done differently? Scott Francis (Jan 29)
- Message not available
- Re: What could have been done differently? Scott Francis (Jan 30)
- Re: What could have been done differently? Scott Francis (Jan 28)
- Re: What could have been done differently? Brian Wallingford (Jan 28)
- Bell Labs or Microsoft security? Sean Donelan (Jan 29)
- Re: Bell Labs or Microsoft security? Richard A Steenbergen (Jan 29)
- Re: Bell Labs or Microsoft security? Marshall Eubanks (Jan 29)
- Re: Bell Labs or Microsoft security? Richard A Steenbergen (Jan 29)
- Re: Bell Labs or Microsoft security? Florian Weimer (Jan 29)