[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GNU Thunder
From: |
Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer |
Subject: |
Re: GNU Thunder |
Date: |
Sun, 07 Sep 2014 15:18:40 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) |
William ML Leslie <address@hidden> writes:
> Remember: I'm not suggesting what the outcome of your project will be,
> just that if the result is negative, we still know nothing. When
> testing a system for subterfuge, we need to examine *all* of the
> moving parts, even those that appear to be unused. If the system you're
> building your assembler on is compromised, it can still give you a
> negative answer. That's what was so scary about this particular type
> of attack.
If I understood Mr. Grant right, the thing is that while a number of GCC
builds might have been infected a decade ago and spreading it everywhere
since we all use GCC built with GCC, if we use a new language right now
to verify GCC, a language which since it's new couldn't have its
evaluator infected at any layer (C compiler, assembler, hardware) since
it's unknown to everyone, then we can be sure. In other words, since
this language with new semantics is being created right here and now,
it's *very* implausible (much more so than GCC being infected) that our
communications would be intercepted right away and this language's
evaluator also immediately infected to make the GCC verification fail.
Also, since we define a simple semantics for which a new evaluator could
be implemented at any time in any language, it becomes ever more and
more implausible that *all* tools everywhere have been previously
"patched" to infect all the evaluators being implemented or
automatically generated in all kinds of different environments.
I might not have fully grokked the topic so I hope I'm not just babbling.
Taylan
- Re: GNU Thunder, Ian Grant, 2014/09/02
- Re: GNU Thunder, Richard Stallman, 2014/09/03
- Re: GNU Thunder, Ian Grant, 2014/09/03
- Re: GNU Thunder, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2014/09/04
- Re: GNU Thunder, Richard Stallman, 2014/09/04
- Re: GNU Thunder, Ian Grant, 2014/09/05
- Re: GNU Thunder, William ML Leslie, 2014/09/06
- Message not available
- Re: GNU Thunder, William ML Leslie, 2014/09/06
- Re: GNU Thunder,
Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer <=
- Re: GNU Thunder, Ian Grant, 2014/09/08
- RE: GNU Thunder [Comments on Subversins from Ian Grant and Richard Stallman of GNU], Dr. Roger R. Schell, 2014/09/06