bugtraq - Re: Update: Web browsers - a mini-farce (MSIE gives in)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 20:59:04 +0300
From: Michael Shigorin <mike@...n.org.ua>
To: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Cc: Michael Wojcik <Michael.Wojcik@...rofocus.com>,
	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Subject: Re: Update: Web browsers - a mini-farce (MSIE gives in)

On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 12:09:22PM -0700, Michael Wojcik wrote:
> It's enough to have a specification

Then you end up shifting the problem to the person to write it.

Writing a spec with *that* detail level is nothing else but
programming in pseudocode.

The net result is that at some level people who do the job loose
control over the situation -- either due to the "plain" problem
being just overly broad, or due to the *neccessary* depth of
non-abstraction (as an effect of code coupling) to overflow
finite-sized human mind.  Even though "they should/must".

So you are both right -- maybe it's worth a step off the opposite
corners of the very same soapbox?

Just my UAH.02

-- 
 ---- WBR, Michael Shigorin <mike@...linux.ru>
  ------ Linux.Kiev http://www.linux.kiev.ua/

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped