From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 20 13:28:55 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EBC91065673 for ; Sat, 20 Nov 2010 13:28:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-ww0-f42.google.com (mail-ww0-f42.google.com [74.125.82.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E23F78FC1C for ; Sat, 20 Nov 2010 13:28:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wwb17 with SMTP id 17so1320804wwb.1 for ; Sat, 20 Nov 2010 05:28:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:subject :message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=14ttaEeb1Qw9zXJUD7tbROHqsMIyXZM2jwvdGlcRllM=; b=iO5WfZDV9lQ/cKk8UKeWcZ+ocWnnzjL6MSETdiSNxXCSXenAqcc82myjwBKHu1N4pn B0XDOO92bT51e7+7fzgdCdWNgWZVGSYjlh3pMgVE8A99D9jzZtuSsnIGiaP71rnddfzs yTImkD4ETGB/f5fXXsX5ucQqKqh9tykvDEfG8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=fVPny10KEirIlgyGXTIjPJxjiVYBIvEJWRnQjmRSpl7KZDR0V4I3Mw9tXh+OSlcKRi bgirmkn9eJpXfVh1qlzpQqzn5q07lXi8uaqPrrf5fN2WvQ7P5A86Hc5UDN6ym/vZOMdh QPAw+Q/P1WbYAZnGhCj7CvF96iuMOLLtWaEZs= Received: by 10.216.15.10 with SMTP id e10mr2176157wee.21.1290259731939; Sat, 20 Nov 2010 05:28:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from gumby.homeunix.com (bb-87-81-140-128.ukonline.co.uk [87.81.140.128]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f31sm1310819wej.15.2010.11.20.05.28.49 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 20 Nov 2010 05:28:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 13:28:45 +0000 From: RW To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20101120132845.51253983@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: References: <201011192054.oAJKsOPk011590@mail.r-bonomi.com> <20101119163648.19c9e66a@scorpio> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.20.1; i386-portbld-freebsd8.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: openssl version - how to verify X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 13:28:55 -0000 On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 00:08:35 -0500 Eitan Adler wrote: > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Jerry > wrote: > > On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 15:08:26 -0600 > > Adam Vande More articulated: > > > >> While I agree with your point in this context, the statement "The > >> number of _UNDISCOVERED_ bugs, on the other hand, is an infinite > >> one." is false. > >> > >> http://www.unsw.edu.au/news/pad/articles/2009/sep/microkernel_breakthrough.html > > > > It was later discovered that the software used to certify the kernel > > 100% bug-free was not itself bug-free thereby nullifying results. > > The paper "Diverse Double-Compiling" by David A Wheeler is relevant > although not strictly the same topic. It could be used to avoid this > type of issue. Even if it works it's only proving that at some level of abstraction the implementation matches a formal specification, there's still scope for higher and lower level bugs. But just because something is unknown doesn't mean it's infinite.