Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?
From: Douglas A. Gwyn (DAGwyn_at_null.net)
Date: 09/14/04
- Next message: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Previous message: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Sebastian Gottschalk: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Next in thread: David Wagner: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Reply: David Wagner: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 23:44:01 -0400
Sebastian Gottschalk wrote:
> The problem of finding the invariants of a loop under Hoare calculus is
> equivalent to the halting problem of a turing machine.
For *arbitrary* ("random") programs, sure, but not for
the vast majority of practical programs. And if during
program construction, the correctness checker warned of
a case that it could not readily verify, that would in
itself be an important warning that the code needs to
be examined; something is probably wrong with it.
- Next message: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Previous message: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Sebastian Gottschalk: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Next in thread: David Wagner: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Reply: David Wagner: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|