Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.electronics.design > #518112 > unrolled thread
| Started by | TTman <kraken.sankey@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-10-02 11:18 +0100 |
| Last post | 2018-10-03 21:49 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 181 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.electronics.design
worldwide internet threat map TTman <kraken.sankey@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 11:18 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-02 07:07 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-02 08:45 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2018-10-02 09:18 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Cursitor Doom <curd@notformail.com> - 2018-10-02 17:22 +0000
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-02 10:28 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bitrex <user@example.net> - 2018-10-02 15:19 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map bitrex <user@example.net> - 2018-10-02 14:59 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2018-10-03 14:32 -0500
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2018-10-02 14:51 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-02 23:29 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2018-10-02 17:58 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2018-10-02 18:08 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-02 19:09 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2018-10-02 19:17 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map boB <boB@K7IQ.com> - 2018-10-02 21:17 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map boB <boB@K7IQ.com> - 2018-10-02 23:25 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-03 01:00 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2018-10-03 03:21 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-03 05:37 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2018-10-03 10:26 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-03 05:42 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2018-10-03 10:40 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-04 01:07 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2018-10-03 14:44 -0500
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2018-10-03 17:27 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 10:50 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2018-10-04 11:38 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-04 12:11 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-04 01:03 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2018-10-03 17:14 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-04 10:47 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-04 08:40 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-04 08:48 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-04 22:32 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-04 15:07 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-05 00:44 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-05 08:47 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-05 17:14 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2018-10-05 12:04 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-05 20:22 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 13:17 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-05 14:28 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2018-10-06 00:17 +0000
Re: worldwide internet threat map Cursitor Doom <curd@notformail.com> - 2018-10-05 16:53 +0000
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2018-10-05 12:08 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bitrex <user@example.net> - 2018-10-03 00:52 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map bitrex <user@example.net> - 2018-10-02 18:30 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2018-10-03 10:23 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-03 05:44 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-03 07:04 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-03 08:29 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-03 10:59 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map boB <boB@K7IQ.com> - 2018-10-03 14:06 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Bert Hickman <bert-hickman@comcast.net> - 2018-10-03 17:20 -0500
Re: worldwide internet threat map boB <boB@K7IQ.com> - 2018-10-04 00:07 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bitrex <user@example.net> - 2018-10-03 12:53 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2018-10-03 10:20 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bitrex <user@example.net> - 2018-10-03 20:36 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-03 20:12 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-03 20:26 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-04 10:53 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map bitrex <user@example.net> - 2018-10-04 11:04 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-04 08:52 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bitrex <user@example.net> - 2018-10-04 13:01 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map bitrex <user@example.net> - 2018-10-04 13:06 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map bitrex <user@example.net> - 2018-10-04 13:10 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-04 10:27 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2018-10-04 20:27 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map bitrex <user@example.net> - 2018-10-04 20:55 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2018-10-04 18:03 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bitrex <user@example.net> - 2018-10-04 21:04 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-05 08:55 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map <698839253X6D445TD@nospam.org> - 2018-10-05 16:12 +0000
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2018-10-05 14:00 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map <698839253X6D445TD@nospam.org> - 2018-10-06 06:03 +0000
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-06 09:22 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map <698839253X6D445TD@nospam.org> - 2018-10-06 18:48 +0000
Re: worldwide internet threat map Neon John <no@never.com> - 2018-10-06 21:17 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-07 08:22 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-07 08:54 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Neon John <no@never.com> - 2018-10-07 11:56 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-05 17:18 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2018-10-05 14:04 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-05 23:41 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2018-10-05 15:47 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-06 00:05 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2018-10-05 16:12 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2018-10-06 00:24 +0000
Re: worldwide internet threat map Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2018-10-06 12:57 +1000
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-06 08:19 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2018-10-06 22:21 +1000
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-06 09:31 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2018-10-06 09:39 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-06 10:45 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-06 08:13 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-06 09:02 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-06 09:40 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 11:26 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 11:27 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map <698839253X6D445TD@nospam.org> - 2018-10-06 18:48 +0000
Re: worldwide internet threat map Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2018-10-09 11:26 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-09 07:07 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-09 07:19 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Chris <xxx.syseng.yyy@gfsys.co.uk> - 2018-10-09 17:11 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-09 09:53 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2018-10-09 20:27 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-09 17:32 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-10 18:03 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-10 18:25 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Chris <c@b.a> - 2018-10-11 11:29 +1100
Re: worldwide internet threat map Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2018-10-05 14:47 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-06 10:47 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-04 18:45 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-04 19:35 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-05 08:04 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-05 09:08 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-05 18:16 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-05 19:24 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Cursitor Doom <curd@notformail.com> - 2018-10-05 16:55 +0000
Re: worldwide internet threat map Neon John <no@never.com> - 2018-10-05 14:50 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2018-10-09 10:42 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-09 07:10 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-09 17:27 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-04 18:30 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bitrex <user@example.net> - 2018-10-04 21:00 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map bitrex <user@example.net> - 2018-10-04 21:03 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-04 10:10 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-04 22:38 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-04 15:08 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-05 00:47 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-05 09:19 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-05 18:48 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2018-10-05 14:08 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-05 09:15 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-05 18:55 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2018-10-05 14:12 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-05 14:37 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-06 00:01 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 23:18 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-06 09:52 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-06 10:53 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-06 20:29 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-09 08:33 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 11:18 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-06 11:20 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-05 19:35 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 05:24 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-06 06:53 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-04 18:12 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 19:04 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-05 09:22 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-05 09:27 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-05 19:45 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-05 19:44 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2018-10-04 17:00 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map bitrex <user@example.net> - 2018-10-03 20:42 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2018-10-03 18:31 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2018-10-04 09:23 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-04 09:06 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2018-10-04 17:49 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-04 10:14 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-03 10:55 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-10-04 01:10 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 13:13 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2018-10-03 13:47 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2018-10-04 09:26 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map Neon John <no@never.com> - 2018-10-04 10:22 -0400
Re: worldwide internet threat map makolber@yahoo.com - 2018-10-04 08:16 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-04 08:44 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2018-10-04 17:15 +0100
Re: worldwide internet threat map John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2018-10-04 09:14 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2018-10-04 09:31 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2018-10-04 07:51 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2018-10-04 08:27 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2018-10-04 09:57 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2018-10-03 14:29 -0500
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-03 13:11 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map dplatt@coop.radagast.org (Dave Platt) - 2018-10-03 13:33 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com - 2018-10-03 16:02 -0700
Re: worldwide internet threat map Cows are Nice <nice@cows.moo> - 2018-10-03 21:49 -0700
Page 4 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 10 Next page →
| From | bill.sloman@ieee.org |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 20:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1b0442d1-9631-4bc9-b0fe-d88e698a14b0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #518297 |
On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 1:12:14 PM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote: > On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 20:36:11 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: > > >On 10/03/2018 01:20 PM, John Larkin wrote: > >> On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 12:53:41 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: > >> > >>> On 10/03/2018 10:04 AM, John Larkin wrote: > >>>> On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 10:23:15 +0100, Martin Brown > >>>> <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On 02/10/2018 22:51, John Larkin wrote: > >>>>>> On Tue, 02 Oct 2018 09:18:47 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Tue, 02 Oct 2018 07:07:33 -0700, John Larkin > >>>>>>> <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 11:18:56 +0100, TTman <kraken.sankey@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>> wrote: <snip> > >Just not using C or junky C++ from the 1980s and 90s would help a lot. > > Yes. c pushes everything onto the stack... data, pointers to code, all > sorts of nasty stuff. And x86 brutally mismanages stacks. > > So, until we get a decent hardware architecture, pseudocode should be > the standard for distributing applications. Too bad that's not going > to happen. > > We're living in the dark ages of computing. John Larkin is living in his own personal dark age of computing. > >C++ has improved in its modern incarnations and there are other newer > >compiled languages that claim to offer the speed of C plus no undefined > >behavior/automatic enforcement of secure coding practices. it'll take > >time for this stuff to filter down, though. A lot of shit code has > >already been released. > > > >But there's no reasonable way to verify any modern piece of compute > >hardware or non-trivial software is utterly 100% un-exploitable and > >semantically correct. > > We'd need to have a modern architecture to try. "Modern" just means recent. The implied contrast is with "old-fashioned" but computing hardware is optimised for particular applications, and the most profitable applications have been changing rapidly over the past few decades, and most of those applications haven't involved running absolutely secure software. John Larkin is using "modern" here to mean "magical". -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 10:53 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <eqltD.549291$ju.383362@fx18.am4> |
| In reply to | #518297 |
On 04/10/18 04:12, John Larkin wrote: > On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 20:36:11 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >> C++ has improved in its modern incarnations and there are other newer >> compiled languages that claim to offer the speed of C plus no undefined >> behavior/automatic enforcement of secure coding practices. it'll take >> time for this stuff to filter down, though. A lot of shit code has >> already been released. >> >> But there's no reasonable way to verify any modern piece of compute >> hardware or non-trivial software is utterly 100% un-exploitable and >> semantically correct. > > We'd need to have a modern architecture to try. There is precisely one such modern architecture in existence: see https://millcomputing.com/ It has very interesting hardware and software properties, being based on experience personally gained over the past half century on a wide range of architectures. But they are not fools. It is explicitly designed to run all languages efficiently, specifically including C.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bitrex <user@example.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 11:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <j_ptD.183985$Ac3.53282@fx45.iad> |
| In reply to | #518297 |
On 10/03/2018 11:12 PM, John Larkin wrote: > We're living in the dark ages of computing. And yet already bumping up against physical/quantum mechanical limits of CMOS feature size! >> C++ has improved in its modern incarnations and there are other newer >> compiled languages that claim to offer the speed of C plus no undefined >> behavior/automatic enforcement of secure coding practices. it'll take >> time for this stuff to filter down, though. A lot of shit code has >> already been released. >> >> But there's no reasonable way to verify any modern piece of compute >> hardware or non-trivial software is utterly 100% un-exploitable and >> semantically correct. > > We'd need to have a modern architecture to try. Well the graveyard of tech biz history is littered with companies who developed the One True Architecture or the One True OS the usual result being nobody ever used it for anything. :(
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 08:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <47dcrdd5ru79tlmssup8poapbi3f3lpn8e@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #518324 |
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 11:04:47 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >On 10/03/2018 11:12 PM, John Larkin wrote: > >> We're living in the dark ages of computing. > >And yet already bumping up against physical/quantum mechanical limits of >CMOS feature size! > >>> C++ has improved in its modern incarnations and there are other newer >>> compiled languages that claim to offer the speed of C plus no undefined >>> behavior/automatic enforcement of secure coding practices. it'll take >>> time for this stuff to filter down, though. A lot of shit code has >>> already been released. >>> >>> But there's no reasonable way to verify any modern piece of compute >>> hardware or non-trivial software is utterly 100% un-exploitable and >>> semantically correct. >> >> We'd need to have a modern architecture to try. > >Well the graveyard of tech biz history is littered with companies who >developed the One True Architecture or the One True OS the usual result >being nobody ever used it for anything. :( c is now 46 years old. Windows was introduced 35 years ago. x86 is 39 years old and was obsolete the day it was introduced. Practically nobody here seems to be willing to consider that things will ever change... and not just about computing. People with that mindset can hardly be expected to design anything interesting, and don't. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc lunatic fringe electronics
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bitrex <user@example.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 13:01 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <EHrtD.203958$3L2.56883@fx44.iad> |
| In reply to | #518332 |
On 10/04/2018 11:52 AM, John Larkin wrote: > On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 11:04:47 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: > >> On 10/03/2018 11:12 PM, John Larkin wrote: >> >>> We're living in the dark ages of computing. >> >> And yet already bumping up against physical/quantum mechanical limits of >> CMOS feature size! >> >>>> C++ has improved in its modern incarnations and there are other newer >>>> compiled languages that claim to offer the speed of C plus no undefined >>>> behavior/automatic enforcement of secure coding practices. it'll take >>>> time for this stuff to filter down, though. A lot of shit code has >>>> already been released. >>>> >>>> But there's no reasonable way to verify any modern piece of compute >>>> hardware or non-trivial software is utterly 100% un-exploitable and >>>> semantically correct. >>> >>> We'd need to have a modern architecture to try. >> >> Well the graveyard of tech biz history is littered with companies who >> developed the One True Architecture or the One True OS the usual result >> being nobody ever used it for anything. :( > > > c is now 46 years old. Windows was introduced 35 years ago. x86 is 39 > years old and was obsolete the day it was introduced. > > Practically nobody here seems to be willing to consider that things > will ever change... and not just about computing. People with that > mindset can hardly be expected to design anything interesting, and > don't. > I almost never use C anymore, not even for 8 bit processors. Only time I might use it is for "legacy" reasons I doubt I would ever implement a new project with it. Modern C++ variants make writing secure and bug-free code ten times easier than it was 25 years ago, even on an 8 bit platform and the overhead compared to C is inconsequential. There's no excuse for writing code that has memory leaks or stack overflow bugs in 2018. Should be a fireable offense first time. I almost never use Windows anymore either I mostly stick to Linux or MacOS when I'm feeling "artistic." a book called "Windows: What The Hell Happened?" probably needs to be written
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bitrex <user@example.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 13:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <JMrtD.100509$ZJ2.63301@fx33.iad> |
| In reply to | #518332 |
On 10/04/2018 11:52 AM, John Larkin wrote: > On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 11:04:47 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: > >> On 10/03/2018 11:12 PM, John Larkin wrote: >> >>> We're living in the dark ages of computing. >> >> And yet already bumping up against physical/quantum mechanical limits of >> CMOS feature size! >> >>>> C++ has improved in its modern incarnations and there are other newer >>>> compiled languages that claim to offer the speed of C plus no undefined >>>> behavior/automatic enforcement of secure coding practices. it'll take >>>> time for this stuff to filter down, though. A lot of shit code has >>>> already been released. >>>> >>>> But there's no reasonable way to verify any modern piece of compute >>>> hardware or non-trivial software is utterly 100% un-exploitable and >>>> semantically correct. >>> >>> We'd need to have a modern architecture to try. >> >> Well the graveyard of tech biz history is littered with companies who >> developed the One True Architecture or the One True OS the usual result >> being nobody ever used it for anything. :( > > > c is now 46 years old. Windows was introduced 35 years ago. x86 is 39 > years old and was obsolete the day it was introduced. > > Practically nobody here seems to be willing to consider that things > will ever change... and not just about computing. People with that > mindset can hardly be expected to design anything interesting, and > don't. > > Just not writing code something like (as an example someone posted in another group): if (a.foo[1] == b.bar[2] == a.bar[1] == a.foo[2] == ....etc.) helps a lot. All "copypaste" code like that is error prone and subject to operator fatigue i.e. coder gets tired and forgets to change all the indicies to what they need to be after copy-pasting. Modern complied languages have proxy objects you use to avoid interacting with the data itself like iterator objects that you operate with as a proxy and can do stuff like std::compare(foo, bar, ...insert your range here) If you don't actually have to modify the data don't touch the container holding it directly!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bitrex <user@example.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 13:10 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pQrtD.65357$xI1.33910@fx13.iad> |
| In reply to | #518347 |
On 10/04/2018 01:06 PM, bitrex wrote: > On 10/04/2018 11:52 AM, John Larkin wrote: >> On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 11:04:47 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >> >>> On 10/03/2018 11:12 PM, John Larkin wrote: >>> >>>> We're living in the dark ages of computing. >>> >>> And yet already bumping up against physical/quantum mechanical limits of >>> CMOS feature size! >>> >>>>> C++ has improved in its modern incarnations and there are other newer >>>>> compiled languages that claim to offer the speed of C plus no >>>>> undefined >>>>> behavior/automatic enforcement of secure coding practices. it'll take >>>>> time for this stuff to filter down, though. A lot of shit code has >>>>> already been released. >>>>> >>>>> But there's no reasonable way to verify any modern piece of compute >>>>> hardware or non-trivial software is utterly 100% un-exploitable and >>>>> semantically correct. >>>> >>>> We'd need to have a modern architecture to try. >>> >>> Well the graveyard of tech biz history is littered with companies who >>> developed the One True Architecture or the One True OS the usual result >>> being nobody ever used it for anything. :( >> >> >> c is now 46 years old. Windows was introduced 35 years ago. x86 is 39 >> years old and was obsolete the day it was introduced. >> >> Practically nobody here seems to be willing to consider that things >> will ever change... and not just about computing. People with that >> mindset can hardly be expected to design anything interesting, and >> don't. >> >> > > Just not writing code something like (as an example someone posted in > another group): > > if (a.foo[1] == b.bar[2] == a.bar[1] == a.foo[2] == ....etc.) > > helps a lot. All "copypaste" code like that is error prone and subject > to operator fatigue i.e. coder gets tired and forgets to change all the > indicies to what they need to be after copy-pasting. Modern complied > languages have proxy objects you use to avoid interacting with the data > itself like iterator objects that you operate with as a proxy and can do > stuff like std::compare(foo, bar, ...insert your range here) > > If you don't actually have to modify the data don't touch the container > holding it directly! Another way to avoid your Mars orbiter crashing is to use stronger types. an raw int or float shouldn't be used for something representing a dollar value. Money is Money it isn't an int. or a floating point value. meters/second is meters/second, not a float. You could make a language that enforces that and some do but who likes rules?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 10:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3a1cb179-acbf-4204-97ce-183ac119c5b5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #518349 |
This thread has turned pretty well south. Internet security is an important issue, but talking about trashing pretty much our entire network system and redesigning all PCs from the ground up is insane. JL like simple solutions whether or not they work. In his little designs he can try things out, but in things like this he has no real concept of the magnitude of what he is suggesting. Rick C.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 20:27 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <pp5pjm$ih9$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #518352 |
On 04/10/2018 18:27, gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com wrote: > This thread has turned pretty well south. Internet security is an > important issue, but talking about trashing pretty much our entire > network system and redesigning all PCs from the ground up is insane. > > JL like simple solutions whether or not they work. In his little > designs he can try things out, but in things like this he has no real > concept of the magnitude of what he is suggesting. It is a concrete example of the classic maxim that for every complex problem there is a simple *WRONG* answer. -- Regards, Martin Brown
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bitrex <user@example.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 20:55 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <yEytD.185183$Ac3.129341@fx45.iad> |
| In reply to | #518362 |
On 10/04/2018 03:27 PM, Martin Brown wrote: > On 04/10/2018 18:27, gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com wrote: >> This thread has turned pretty well south. Internet security is an >> important issue, but talking about trashing pretty much our entire >> network system and redesigning all PCs from the ground up is insane. >> >> JL like simple solutions whether or not they work. In his little >> designs he can try things out, but in things like this he has no real >> concept of the magnitude of what he is suggesting. > > It is a concrete example of the classic maxim that > > for every complex problem there is a simple *WRONG* answer. > There are no wrong solutions to an engineering problem, just solutions which don't meet the requirements. All things being equal it's probably best to look at the simple ones first - better is the enemy of good and premature optimization is the root of all evil. At least then you have a baseline for how badly they fall short of the mark.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 18:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <rmddrdhn3ofu527dcfpl1d0glc930q6d7s@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #518362 |
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 20:27:52 +0100, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote: >On 04/10/2018 18:27, gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com wrote: >> This thread has turned pretty well south. Internet security is an >> important issue, but talking about trashing pretty much our entire >> network system and redesigning all PCs from the ground up is insane. >> >> JL like simple solutions whether or not they work. In his little >> designs he can try things out, but in things like this he has no real >> concept of the magnitude of what he is suggesting. > >It is a concrete example of the classic maxim that > >for every complex problem there is a simple *WRONG* answer. Oh, I have no illusions that anyone will fix the internet security mess in my lifetime. With a zillion IoT devices and international espionage, things will only get worse. IBM and Intel and Microsoft messed things up too badly to fix any time soon. I have some good ideas of how to make things better, but nobody here wants to discuss them, or suggest any alternates. This "design" group is mostly emotionally hostile to new ideas. Only a few people here are capable of brainstorming, or of serious electronic design. So, call me an idiot, or suggest a better os and internet architecture, and we'll see which group you are in. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing precision measurement jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bitrex <user@example.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 21:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <QMytD.84877$ql2.39828@fx06.iad> |
| In reply to | #518389 |
On 10/04/2018 09:03 PM, John Larkin wrote: > On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 20:27:52 +0100, Martin Brown > <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >> On 04/10/2018 18:27, gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com wrote: >>> This thread has turned pretty well south. Internet security is an >>> important issue, but talking about trashing pretty much our entire >>> network system and redesigning all PCs from the ground up is insane. >>> >>> JL like simple solutions whether or not they work. In his little >>> designs he can try things out, but in things like this he has no real >>> concept of the magnitude of what he is suggesting. >> >> It is a concrete example of the classic maxim that >> >> for every complex problem there is a simple *WRONG* answer. > > Oh, I have no illusions that anyone will fix the internet security > mess in my lifetime. With a zillion IoT devices and international > espionage, things will only get worse. IBM and Intel and Microsoft > messed things up too badly to fix any time soon. > > I have some good ideas of how to make things better, but nobody here > wants to discuss them, or suggest any alternates. This "design" group > is mostly emotionally hostile to new ideas. Only a few people here are > capable of brainstorming, or of serious electronic design. > > So, call me an idiot, or suggest a better os and internet > architecture, and we'll see which group you are in. > Not hostile to new ideas but "scrap it all and start over" is incidentally not what I'd call a very "conservative" philosophy on engineering!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-05 08:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g02frd1cnssd95hjt586p14d76qbo934ef@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #518391 |
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 21:04:48 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >On 10/04/2018 09:03 PM, John Larkin wrote: >> On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 20:27:52 +0100, Martin Brown >> <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> >>> On 04/10/2018 18:27, gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com wrote: >>>> This thread has turned pretty well south. Internet security is an >>>> important issue, but talking about trashing pretty much our entire >>>> network system and redesigning all PCs from the ground up is insane. >>>> >>>> JL like simple solutions whether or not they work. In his little >>>> designs he can try things out, but in things like this he has no real >>>> concept of the magnitude of what he is suggesting. >>> >>> It is a concrete example of the classic maxim that >>> >>> for every complex problem there is a simple *WRONG* answer. >> >> Oh, I have no illusions that anyone will fix the internet security >> mess in my lifetime. With a zillion IoT devices and international >> espionage, things will only get worse. IBM and Intel and Microsoft >> messed things up too badly to fix any time soon. >> >> I have some good ideas of how to make things better, but nobody here >> wants to discuss them, or suggest any alternates. This "design" group >> is mostly emotionally hostile to new ideas. Only a few people here are >> capable of brainstorming, or of serious electronic design. >> >> So, call me an idiot, or suggest a better os and internet >> architecture, and we'll see which group you are in. >> > >Not hostile to new ideas but "scrap it all and start over" is >incidentally not what I'd call a very "conservative" philosophy on >engineering! My original suggestion, that the internet transport layer could apply security for everyone, is hardly a suggestion to scrap anything. I'd pay a ISP more if they scrubbed hazards at the network level. We already pay a DNS provider to not serve up suspected IP addresses. Some free ones now do that too. Nobody else has yet suggested anything. Just complaining about anyone having ideas. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc lunatic fringe electronics
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <698839253X6D445TD@nospam.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-05 16:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp82is$emi$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #518429 |
John Larkin stated >My original suggestion, that the internet transport layer could apply >security for everyone, is hardly a suggestion to scrap anything. I'd >pay a ISP more if they scrubbed hazards at the network level. We >already pay a DNS provider to not serve up suspected IP addresses. >Some free ones now do that too. 1) There exist NO 100% secure system, and never will. 2) Lots of work has been done to make the internet more secure. >Nobody else has yet suggested anything. Just complaining about anyone >having ideas. What ideas? have you even ever written a TCP stack?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-05 14:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ipdfrdli874tl4oaml3rdqm37sf3iprfo6@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #518432 |
On Fri, 05 Oct 2018 16:12:31 GMT, <698839253X6D445TD@nospam.org> wrote: >John Larkin stated >>My original suggestion, that the internet transport layer could apply >>security for everyone, is hardly a suggestion to scrap anything. I'd >>pay a ISP more if they scrubbed hazards at the network level. We >>already pay a DNS provider to not serve up suspected IP addresses. >>Some free ones now do that too. > > > >1) There exist NO 100% secure system, and never will. I'm not sure that's true, but there is tons of room for improvement. Seat belts don't guarantee no injuries, but they sure help. Don't write off improvements because they are not perfect. >2) Lots of work has been done to make the internet more secure. Absolutely. > > >>Nobody else has yet suggested anything. Just complaining about anyone >>having ideas. > >What ideas? have you even ever written a TCP stack? Not me, but one guy who works for me has. He does bare-metal apps that do ethernet and web pages. Absolutely virus-proof. I mostly design hardware these days. I did write some RTOSs and compilers and stuff. But coding is boring to me, compared to designing hardware, so now I brainstorm architectures and delegate the actual coding. This is an electronic design group. It is interesting to consider the realtime limits of the code when designing the hardware. Like moving some math into FPGAs to take the load off little ARMs. We do some square-and-average stuff in FPGAs for RMS measurements, and let the ARM take over and do the less-frequent square root and calibrations. But we have one product where the ARM generates DDS sine waves in software, straight into its own DAC. Last week we decided that an ARM can use its ADC to scan the ground-leg supply current of 12 synchro driver amplifier channels, and shut them down before anything really bad happens, if our customers start shorting things. That's simpler than doing it analog, with comparators and stuff. Some of our products compute mosfet power dissipation in real time, and calculate junction temperature based on a thermal model. That lets us push the fets really hard. I wrote that code in 68K assembly. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing precision measurement jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <698839253X6D445TD@nospam.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-06 06:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp9j7m$pb6$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #518459 |
John Larkin wrote >On Fri, 05 Oct 2018 16:12:31 GMT, <698839253X6D445TD@nospam.org> >wrote: > >>John Larkin stated >>>My original suggestion, that the internet transport layer could apply >>>security for everyone, is hardly a suggestion to scrap anything. I'd >>>pay a ISP more if they scrubbed hazards at the network level. We >>>already pay a DNS provider to not serve up suspected IP addresses. >>>Some free ones now do that too. >> >> >> >>1) There exist NO 100% secure system, and never will. > >I'm not sure that's true, but there is tons of room for improvement. >Seat belts don't guarantee no injuries, but they sure help. > >Don't write off improvements because they are not perfect. It is from the crypto crowd, I must confess that usually within a few hours you can find a security hole in a 'secure' system, as you often state: just by 'thinking out of the box'. >>2) Lots of work has been done to make the internet more secure. > >Absolutely. > >> >> >>>Nobody else has yet suggested anything. Just complaining about anyone >>>having ideas. >> >>What ideas? have you even ever written a TCP stack? > >Not me, but one guy who works for me has. He does bare-metal apps that >do ethernet and web pages. Absolutely virus-proof. I mostly design >hardware these days. I did, well there is a story behind it, of course when I figured out how that worked and wrote that code I had an idea, connected to my ISP (company no longer exists today) and tried it out. It put them offline for a long time, no it was not intentional, just that the router designers had the same idea. Then (that was deliberate) tried to kill existing ... well, yes it worked. I still have that old code maybe from 5 1/2 inch floppies... Anyways later did an UDP stack in PIC asm (you do not want to write that stuff in snake language or BASIC) and it is in use in several projects here, now for several years. Is it safe? No way, but then writing all that code also clearly gives some understanding and you see 'possibilities' Specs are available, so it is just coding fun. >I did write some RTOSs and compilers and stuff. But coding is boring >to me, compared to designing hardware, so now I brainstorm >architectures and delegate the actual coding. This is an electronic >design group. > >It is interesting to consider the realtime limits of the code when >designing the hardware. Like moving some math into FPGAs to take the >load off little ARMs. We do some square-and-average stuff in FPGAs for >RMS measurements, and let the ARM take over and do the less-frequent >square root and calibrations. But we have one product where the ARM >generates DDS sine waves in software, straight into its own DAC. Yes, been doing that with FPGA, wrote a simple video standard converter from NTSC to PAL too. In the old days that was half a room full of equipment (BBC had one). >Last week we decided that an ARM can use its ADC to scan the >ground-leg supply current of 12 synchro driver amplifier channels, and >shut them down before anything really bad happens, if our customers >start shorting things. That's simpler than doing it analog, with >comparators and stuff. > >Some of our products compute mosfet power dissipation in real time, >and calculate junction temperature based on a thermal model. That lets >us push the fets really hard. I wrote that code in 68K assembly. Bit scary, I like temperature sensors.. on critical points, even if it is just 'clicsons'. Software can fail, hardware can fail... Real fuses.. When working on those marine vessel electronics somebody told me that in case of combat some power fuses get bridged. Not sure things are still that way, but indeed if you cannot fire or move your guns because of a blown fuse.. But then they used Microsoft to control their stuff, and a whole warship was disabled. Maybe blue screen, rebooting? IIRC the Russians once did an EMP attack on a US warship while flying past it, and the ships electronics shut down, even causing some to quit the service. YMMV.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-06 09:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8dmhrdl2ts9j8p0sbpgulofne2ut82cot5@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #518510 |
On Sat, 06 Oct 2018 06:03:29 GMT, <698839253X6D445TD@nospam.org> wrote: >John Larkin wrote >>On Fri, 05 Oct 2018 16:12:31 GMT, <698839253X6D445TD@nospam.org> >>wrote: >> >>>John Larkin stated >>>>My original suggestion, that the internet transport layer could apply >>>>security for everyone, is hardly a suggestion to scrap anything. I'd >>>>pay a ISP more if they scrubbed hazards at the network level. We >>>>already pay a DNS provider to not serve up suspected IP addresses. >>>>Some free ones now do that too. >>> >>> >>> >>>1) There exist NO 100% secure system, and never will. >> >>I'm not sure that's true, but there is tons of room for improvement. >>Seat belts don't guarantee no injuries, but they sure help. >> >>Don't write off improvements because they are not perfect. > >It is from the crypto crowd, I must confess that usually within a few hours you >can find a security hole in a 'secure' system, >as you often state: just by 'thinking out of the box'. > > > > >>>2) Lots of work has been done to make the internet more secure. >> >>Absolutely. >> >>> >>> >>>>Nobody else has yet suggested anything. Just complaining about anyone >>>>having ideas. >>> >>>What ideas? have you even ever written a TCP stack? >> >>Not me, but one guy who works for me has. He does bare-metal apps that >>do ethernet and web pages. Absolutely virus-proof. I mostly design >>hardware these days. > > >I did, well there is a story behind it, of course when I figured out how that worked and wrote that code >I had an idea, connected to my ISP (company no longer exists today) and tried it out. >It put them offline for a long time, no it was not intentional, just that the router designers had the same idea. >Then (that was deliberate) tried to kill existing ... well, yes it worked. >I still have that old code maybe from 5 1/2 inch floppies... >Anyways later did an UDP stack in PIC asm (you do not want to write that stuff in snake language or BASIC) >and it is in use in several projects here, now for several years. >Is it safe? No way, but then writing all that code also clearly gives some understanding and you see 'possibilities' >Specs are available, so it is just coding fun. > > My guy asked me if I'd mind if he put our bare-metal c/ARM TCP/UDP stack up on github, and I said OK. I'll see if it's there. > > >>I did write some RTOSs and compilers and stuff. But coding is boring >>to me, compared to designing hardware, so now I brainstorm >>architectures and delegate the actual coding. This is an electronic >>design group. >> >>It is interesting to consider the realtime limits of the code when >>designing the hardware. Like moving some math into FPGAs to take the >>load off little ARMs. We do some square-and-average stuff in FPGAs for >>RMS measurements, and let the ARM take over and do the less-frequent >>square root and calibrations. But we have one product where the ARM >>generates DDS sine waves in software, straight into its own DAC. > >Yes, been doing that with FPGA, wrote a simple video standard converter from NTSC to PAL too. >In the old days that was half a room full of equipment (BBC had one). > > >>Last week we decided that an ARM can use its ADC to scan the >>ground-leg supply current of 12 synchro driver amplifier channels, and >>shut them down before anything really bad happens, if our customers >>start shorting things. That's simpler than doing it analog, with >>comparators and stuff. >> >>Some of our products compute mosfet power dissipation in real time, >>and calculate junction temperature based on a thermal model. That lets >>us push the fets really hard. I wrote that code in 68K assembly. > >Bit scary, I like temperature sensors.. on critical points, even if it is just 'clicsons'. Not scary! We measure heat sink temperature and mosfet voltage and current. A couple of thousand times a second, we run a dynamic thermal model of Tj. That's a lot better protection than a current limit or a foldback limit. We can push fets harder than some dumb electrical limit, but be safer. Here's an analog circuit that does sort of the same thing, compute fet power. https://www.dropbox.com/s/72g5lqqvnbzs6pf/Soar_4.jpg?raw=1 Add a time constant to approximate junction mass, roughly 100 ms, and sum in heat sink temp, and then hit a comparator. >Software can fail, hardware can fail... Software doesn't fail is it's bug-free. >Real fuses.. But they would have to be replaced. >When working on those marine vessel electronics somebody told me that in case of combat >some power fuses get bridged. >Not sure things are still that way, but indeed if you cannot fire or move your guns because of a blown fuse.. > >But then they used Microsoft to control their stuff, and a whole warship was disabled. >Maybe blue screen, rebooting? > >IIRC the Russians once did an EMP attack on a US warship while flying past it, >and the ships electronics shut down, even causing some to quit the service. >YMMV. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc lunatic fringe electronics
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <698839253X6D445TD@nospam.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-06 18:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ppb01c$13i4$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #518536 |
John Larkin wrote >>>On Fri, 05 Oct 2018 16:12:31 GMT, <698839253X6D445TD@nospam.org> >>>>What ideas? have you even ever written a TCP stack? >>> >>>Not me, but one guy who works for me has. He does bare-metal apps that >>>do ethernet and web pages. Absolutely virus-proof. I mostly design >>>hardware these days. ... >My guy asked me if I'd mind if he put our bare-metal c/ARM TCP/UDP >stack up on github, and I said OK. I'll see if it's there. OK, open source, it is in the Linux kernel too. ARM - raspberry- gcc. >>Yes, been doing that with FPGA, wrote a simple video standard converter from NTSC to PAL too. >>In the old days that was half a room full of equipment (BBC had one). >> >> >>>Last week we decided that an ARM can use its ADC to scan the >>>ground-leg supply current of 12 synchro driver amplifier channels, and >>>shut them down before anything really bad happens, if our customers >>>start shorting things. That's simpler than doing it analog, with >>>comparators and stuff. The nice thing about the PICs I use it that those have 2 hardware comparators directly wired to the PWM generator and can stop it if some level is exceeded. Nice to measure current in some output stage.. either in a MOSFET source or via some current transformer. I like the 1:10 very small ringcore current transformers, so easy to wind :-) >>>Some of our products compute mosfet power dissipation in real time, >>>and calculate junction temperature based on a thermal model. That lets >>>us push the fets really hard. I wrote that code in 68K assembly. >> >>Bit scary, I like temperature sensors.. on critical points, even if it is just 'clicsons'. > >Not scary! We measure heat sink temperature and mosfet voltage and >current. A couple of thousand times a second, we run a dynamic thermal >model of Tj. That's a lot better protection than a current limit or a >foldback limit. We can push fets harder than some dumb electrical >limit, but be safer. You depend on the thermal delay, to reduce drive before things get too hot? >Here's an analog circuit that does sort of the same thing, compute fet >power. > >https://www.dropbox.com/s/72g5lqqvnbzs6pf/Soar_4.jpg?raw=1 > >Add a time constant to approximate junction mass, roughly 100 ms, and >sum in heat sink temp, and then hit a comparator. Ah yes 100% linear P = U * I :-) > >>Software can fail, hardware can fail... > >Software doesn't fail is it's bug-free. mmm Processors can do very strange things, in interrupts for example unexpected things may surface after a long time Bug free? no I do not think so, at least not always. Testing is very important, Here is a nice 'bug', program crashes and then is restarted , wrote some script to show when Sat Oct 6 05:51:25 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 05:51:37 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 05:51:48 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 06:23:01 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 10:18:38 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 10:19:38 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 10:19:54 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 10:20:41 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 10:22:34 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 10:23:08 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 10:23:57 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 10:26:04 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 11:34:14 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 11:34:30 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 15:23:39 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 15:24:43 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 15:40:11 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 15:40:23 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 15:50:12 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 15:50:43 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 16:29:14 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 16:29:39 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 16:32:23 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 16:35:48 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 16:36:00 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 16:36:14 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 16:36:31 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 16:37:45 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 16:40:10 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 16:43:08 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 17:21:09 CEST 2018 Sat Oct 6 17:21:21 CEST 2018 looks like LAN ethernet congestion, UDP is not error free... But why does it crash> I did code some exit(1) statements should go over that code again. And that is not PICs, but Linux on a fast computer.... load factor often much higher than 5. bug? or just error handling? Will see later,. >>Real fuses.. > >But they would have to be replaced. Better the fuse than all those expensive components. Tomorrow some soldering is planned, just received these: https://www.ebay.com/itm/400985231769 makes life so much easier for test circuits. Small SSOP PLLs will go on it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Neon John <no@never.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-06 21:17 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <0mdird9m9ig6isq4jqphr40o97pqbfd9n1@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #518459 |
On Fri, 05 Oct 2018 14:00:25 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> wrote: >>1) There exist NO 100% secure system, and never will. > >I'm not sure that's true, but there is tons of room for improvement. >Seat belts don't guarantee no injuries, but they sure help. > >Don't write off improvements because they are not perfect. It's been fun to watch this discussion from the sidelines when an easy solution is looking y'all in the face. Linux. Specifically Ubuntu Linux. Linux is vastly more secure than the commercial OSs not only because the programmers know what they're doing but also because there are thousands of eyes looking at the code for bugs and errors. Someone asked who to trust. Trust is not something one can make; it must be earned. Based on their long term reputation, I put my trust in Canonical, distributors of Ubuntu. Ubuntu uses the Debian distribution model. Just about any application one could want is kept in the Ubuntu repository. Every program in the repository is vetted and signed with an encrypted signature. Any package I want to install is in that repository. The only thing Canonical does that I don't like is that they don't back-port new applications to the last LTS (long term service). Usually the original authors do that and put the package in a PPA. A PPA is like the repository but for (usually) one package. Canonical has to bless the PPA AND the package must have been discussed favorably on askubuntu.com. Canonical has a red team which constantly tries to break Ubuntu. When they find a vulnerably, Canonical sends out a patch within hours and long before an exploit appears in the wild. The other piece of the security puzzle is that the default MUA (mail user agent) only displays 7 bit ASCII. NO HTML! I've seen big globs of obfuscated javascript come through, probably an exploit for winders but never anything for Ubuntu. Since the MUA only processes ASCII, nothing would happen if the rare Linux exploit came through. In short, in Ubuntu-land, malware is little more than a theoretical concept. And yes, John, if you want to run your QBASIC or whatever, it'll probably run as a native app using WINE. If not then a virtual machine will do the trick. I keep a WinXP and a Win7 VM on my machine. I have some design software which will only run on Win7 and some that won't go higher than XP. So I have the best of both worlds. So maybe if you took off your blinders and tried something new, you'd find that essentially all your security issues have been solved. John John DeArmond http://www.neon-john.com http://www.tnduction.com Tellico Plains, Occupied TN See website for email address
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-07 08:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <i68krdlfjrj5hlogl8vd7ueebifbf7r689@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #518601 |
On Sat, 06 Oct 2018 21:17:04 -0400, Neon John <no@never.com> wrote: >On Fri, 05 Oct 2018 14:00:25 -0700, John Larkin ><jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> wrote: > > >>>1) There exist NO 100% secure system, and never will. >> >>I'm not sure that's true, but there is tons of room for improvement. >>Seat belts don't guarantee no injuries, but they sure help. >> >>Don't write off improvements because they are not perfect. > >It's been fun to watch this discussion from the sidelines when an easy >solution is looking y'all in the face. > >Linux. Specifically Ubuntu Linux. There are millions, maybe billions, of poorly-protected stripped-Linux devices on the net. Things like wifi routers, webcams, voip phones, that are being hacked and used as botnet agents. There are probably light bulbs that run a hacked Linux. Our voip phones run some sort of Linux and download their runtime application any time they power up, or whenever they feel like. We have our voip phones, cams, and guest wi-fi on a seperate (well, virtually separate) network from important stuff. That at least gives us a bit of internal protection. > >Linux is vastly more secure than the commercial OSs not only because >the programmers know what they're doing but also because there are >thousands of eyes looking at the code for bugs and errors. And the people who make cheap gadgets strip the protections, or worse. Network-wide defense would protect them too. We have IT consultants that we pay to keep us secure. An ebay IoT thermostat or light bulb doesn't. > >Someone asked who to trust. Trust is not something one can make; it >must be earned. Based on their long term reputation, I put my trust >in Canonical, distributors of Ubuntu. > >Ubuntu uses the Debian distribution model. Just about any application >one could want is kept in the Ubuntu repository. Every program in the >repository is vetted and signed with an encrypted signature. Any >package I want to install is in that repository. > >The only thing Canonical does that I don't like is that they don't >back-port new applications to the last LTS (long term service). >Usually the original authors do that and put the package in a PPA. > >A PPA is like the repository but for (usually) one package. Canonical >has to bless the PPA AND the package must have been discussed >favorably on askubuntu.com. > >Canonical has a red team which constantly tries to break Ubuntu. When >they find a vulnerably, Canonical sends out a patch within hours and >long before an exploit appears in the wild. > >The other piece of the security puzzle is that the default MUA (mail >user agent) only displays 7 bit ASCII. NO HTML! I've seen big globs >of obfuscated javascript come through, probably an exploit for winders >but never anything for Ubuntu. Since the MUA only processes ASCII, >nothing would happen if the rare Linux exploit came through. > >In short, in Ubuntu-land, malware is little more than a theoretical >concept. > >And yes, John, if you want to run your QBASIC or whatever, it'll >probably run as a native app using WINE. If not then a virtual >machine will do the trick. I keep a WinXP and a Win7 VM on my >machine. I have some design software which will only run on Win7 and >some that won't go higher than XP. So I have the best of both worlds. > >So maybe if you took off your blinders and tried something new, you'd >find that essentially all your security issues have been solved. I'm not worried about my own PCs security; I pay a consultant to do that for me. I'm concerned with the entire system, granny and her smart coffee maker running who-knows what Chinese code. Packet sniffing and net-level security will become a necessity of national defense. ASICS can be developed to do that without serious time hits. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc lunatic fringe electronics
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.electronics.design
csiph-web