full-disclosure - Is a precise spec better?

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <28915501A44DBA4587FE1019D675F9831AE30E@grfint>
From: rgerhards at hq.adiscon.com (Rainer Gerhards)
Subject: Is a precise spec better?

Hi lists,

I am seeking some advise. I am currently writing a what-is-to-become RFC
on the syslog protocol (http://www.syslog.cc/ietf/protocol.html). My
work is currently in draft status, which essentially means it can be
used for discussion but nothing is really fixed yet.

I have written quite precise guidelines on what a syslog implementation
should do. There are good arguments that this is too precise. I am now
trying to get more feedback on the overall design decision. As such, I
have summarized things on a web page:

http://www.syslog.cc/ietf/why-indepth.html

I would appreciate all comments on this topic. As I am posting to
security lists, I would especially welcome a discussion if a precise
specification can eventually safe us some security trouble - and if the
effort is worth it.

Many thanks,
Rainer