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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <200402271643.i1RGhVia007972@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu (Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu) Subject: And how long have buffer overflows been around? On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 10:33:27 EST, Glenn_Everhart@...kone.com said: > There were rumors that the NT kernel was originally called Mica at DEC > and that the code was in fact brought bodily to Microsoft, having > been originally designed to be a VMS followon. If that is true you could > say that the security design was in fact that of VMS V1, which dates The only problem with that theory is that VMS *had* a security design, and there isn't one in NT. The only design overlap there is that Microsoft got some of the VMS design team to come on board for Win/NT. NT got stuck with having to be backward-combatable with Win 3.1, and you can fill in the blanks from there.... -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 226 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20040227/94476a65/attachment.bin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists