Re: Delphi and buffer overflows

Well, actually stating that something is secure because is compiled with 
Delphi or whatever other compiler is used I think is a really dangerous.

What about race conditions? What about stuff like if x < 10 then (and what 
will happen if x for some reason is under 0 and that was never thought off 
while developing and reviewing?).

What about not using least privilege?

Well I guess you get the point. Stating something like that is just weird 
and dangerous.

André

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gadi Evron" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 2:52 AM
Subject: Re: Delphi and buffer overflows


> [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 12:46:06 GMT, [email protected] said:
>>
>>>All Programs compiled in Delphi are secure
>>
>>
>> Explain. Do tell.  How does a language manage to be Turing-complete and
>> at the same time provably secure?  (Hint - Turing-complete includes the
>> possibility of a program infinite looping, so at the very least, there's
>> the possibility of a loop causing a DoS attack....)
>>
>> Or did Delphi use some different definition of "secure"?
>
> Valdis, I tend to like Delphi and agree with the guy, but you are 100% 
> correct.
>
> That is because [especially] in the world of security the following words 
> should be banned: all, every, never, etc.
>
> I bet that if you put a backdoor into a program written in Delphi it will 
> no longer be 100% secure, right? That may be a bit of immature nitpicking, 
> but really..
>