Secure Coding mailing list archives
Re: opinion, ACM Queue: Buffer Overrun Madness
From: der Mouse <mouse () Rodents Montreal QC CA>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 18:47:50 +0100
What there are _not_ are reasons for new development to cling to languages which make flawed constructs easy for the individual programmer to misuse.
Certainly there are - or people wouldn't be doing it. Whether you or I think those reasons are good reasons is another question. (Some of the most obviously plausible: it's what the programmers know; it's what the target sytem supports; it's necessary to interface to some externally-supplied libraries....) /~\ The ASCII der Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML [EMAIL PROTECTED] / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
Current thread:
- Re: opinion, ACM Queue: Buffer Overrun Madness, (continued)
- Re: opinion, ACM Queue: Buffer Overrun Madness der Mouse (Jun 09)
- Re: opinion, ACM Queue: Buffer Overrun Madness ljknews (Jun 09)
- Re: opinion, ACM Queue: Buffer Overrun Madness David Eisner (Jun 09)
- RE: opinion, ACM Queue: Buffer Overrun Madness Peter Amey (Jun 09)
- Re: opinion, ACM Queue: Buffer Overrun Madness Gary McGraw (Jun 09)
- Re: opinion, ACM Queue: Buffer Overrun Madness ljknews (Jun 09)
- RE: opinion, ACM Queue: Buffer Overrun Madness David Crocker (Jun 09)
- Re: opinion, ACM Queue: Buffer Overrun Madness Jared W. Robinson (Jun 10)
- RE: opinion, ACM Queue: Buffer Overrun Madness David Crocker (Jun 11)
- RE: opinion, ACM Queue: Buffer Overrun Madness ljknews (Jun 11)
- Re: opinion, ACM Queue: Buffer Overrun Madness der Mouse (Jun 11)
- RE: opinion, ACM Queue: Buffer Overrun Madness David Crocker (Jun 11)
- Re: opinion, ACM Queue: Buffer Overrun Madness Crispin Cowan (Jun 11)