Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?
From: Douglas A. Gwyn (DAGwyn_at_null.net)
Date: 09/14/04
- Next message: Paul Rubin: "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: Bryan Olson: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Next in thread: Bryan Olson: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Reply: Bryan Olson: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 19:32:39 GMT
Bryan Olson wrote:
> ... Even in a trivial example of your own
> choosing, Paul found a case that you missed.
No, I didn't miss it. I was giving an example, using C
for the code only because that would be understood better
than if I invented a new language or used a lesser-known
one. (In most languages, a construct like a[i] would be
accepted only for a declared as an array.) Obviously
there is a generic issue with pointers in C, and if you
paid attention to the context you would know that I was
not advocating correctness analysis of arbitrary C code.
- Next message: Paul Rubin: "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: Bryan Olson: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Next in thread: Bryan Olson: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Reply: Bryan Olson: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|