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: Bryan Olson: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- In reply to: David Wagner: "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: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 01:31:49 -0400
David Wagner wrote:
> Heck, forget the issue of annotations. It doesn't even make sense
> to talk about program verification until you have a specification of
> desired behavior.
Why would you even write a program without having a
functional specification first?
- Next message: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Previous message: Bryan Olson: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- In reply to: David Wagner: "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 ]