Full Disclosure mailing list archives
RE: Coding securely, was Linux (in)security
From: "Chris Eagle" <cseagle () redshift com>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 19:25:31 -0800
-----Original Message----- From: full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com [mailto:full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com]On Behalf Of Paul Schmehl ... But it shouldn't be the job of the writer of a subroutine to verify the inputs. The writer of a subroutine defines what the appropriate inputs to that routine are, and it's up to the *user* of that subroutine to use it properly. The entire concept behind OOP is that you cannot know what's in the "black box" you're using. That makes it incumbent on you as the
*user*
of a subroutine to use the correct inputs and to *verify* those inputs
when
necessary.
That is the most backward thing I have ever heard. So you are saying all I need to do as a programmer is tell you not to pass a negative number/null pointer/un-initialized value... to my function and I am off the hook. All I can say is that I am glad utdallas doesn't have you teaching programming. The fact that you are unaware what lies inside the black box in no way relieves the responsibility of the designer of the black box to make sure that it behaves predictably under all input cases. Chris _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- Re: Coding securely, was Linux (in)security, (continued)
- Re: Coding securely, was Linux (in)security coderman (Oct 26)
- Re: Coding securely, was Linux (in)security Brett Hutley (Oct 26)
- Re: Coding securely, was Linux (in)security Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 26)
- Re: Coding securely, was Linux (in)security Brett Hutley (Oct 26)
- Re: [inbox] Re: RE: Linux (in)security Bill Royds (Oct 26)
- Re: [inbox] Re: RE: Linux (in)security Bruce Ediger (Oct 26)
- Re: [inbox] Re: RE: Linux (in)security Stormwalker (Oct 27)
- Re: [inbox] Re: RE: Linux (in)security Bill Royds (Oct 27)
- Re: [inbox] Re: RE: Linux (in)security Bruce Ediger (Oct 27)
- Message not available
- Coding securely, was Linux (in)security Paul Schmehl (Oct 26)
- RE: Coding securely, was Linux (in)security Chris Eagle (Oct 26)
- Re: Coding securely, was Linux (in)security Brett Hutley (Oct 26)
- RE: Coding securely, was Linux (in)security Chris Eagle (Oct 26)
- Re: Coding securely, was Linux (in)security Brett Hutley (Oct 26)
- Off topic programming thread Mortis (Oct 26)
- Re: Off topic programming thread Bill Weiss (Oct 27)
- Re: Off topic programming thread Chris Smith (Oct 27)
- RE: Coding securely, was Linux (in)security Paul Schmehl (Oct 26)
- Re: Coding securely, was Linux (in)security Bill Royds (Oct 26)
- Re: Coding securely, was Linux (in)security Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 26)
- Re: Coding securely, was Linux (in)security Brett Hutley (Oct 26)