[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [FYI] Ross Anderson - Open and closed security are roughly

To: debate@lists.fitug.de
Subject: Re: [FYI] Ross Anderson - Open and closed security are roughly
From: Lutz Donnerhacke <lutz@iks-jena.de>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 08:28:36 +0000 (UTC)
Delivered-to: mailing list debate@lists.fitug.de
List-help: <mailto:debate-help@lists.fitug.de>
List-id: <debate.lists.fitug.de>
List-post: <mailto:debate@lists.fitug.de>
List-subscribe: <mailto:debate-subscribe@lists.fitug.de>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:debate-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de>
Mailing-list: contact debate-help@lists.fitug.de; run by ezmlm
Newsgroups: iks.lists.fitug
Organization: IKS GmbH Jena
References: <slrnb4lgop.oco.lutz@belenus.iks-jena.de> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0302131212290.1056-100000@purzelina.optusnet.com.au>
User-agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux)

* Peter Ross wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Feb 2003, Lutz Donnerhacke wrote:
>> Eine formale Verifizierung der Abwesenheit von Fehlerklassen (bis hin zur
>> Abwesenheit aller Laufzeitfehler) ist heute schon möglich und wird gemacht.
>
> Ehrlich, gibt's da _Praktikables_? Kannst Du mich mal auf Anschauens- und 
> Lesenswertes, wie und was da gemacht wird, stossen?

www.sparkada.com


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: debate-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: debate-help@lists.fitug.de

References:
- Re: [FYI] Ross Anderson - Open and closed security are roughly equivalent
  - From: Lutz Donnerhacke <lutz@iks-jena.de>
- Re: [FYI] Ross Anderson - Open and closed security are roughlyequivalent
  - From: Peter Ross <peter.ross@alumni.tu-berlin.de>

Prev by Date: Re: [FYI] Ross Anderson - Open and closed security are roughly equivalent
Next by Date: Re: [FYI] Ross Anderson - Open and closed security are roughly equivalent
Previous by thread: Re: [FYI] Ross Anderson - Open and closed security are roughlyequivalent
Next by thread: Re: [FYI] Ross Anderson - Open and closed security are roughly equivalent
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread