Note that the Cypherpunks Image/Postscript Document Examination
Laboratories should be able
to amplify some of the (US; the unPOWs are black-bagged) faces in the
pix..
Pentagon Seeks Source of Photos
By PAULINE JELINEK
Associated Press Writer
> Back in the early days of compiler benchmarks, one fancy compiler noticed
> that the result of a lengthy calculation wasn't being used, and dutifully
> removed the calculations. That calculation was, of course, the kernel of
> the benchmark. The solution was to print the result.
Or you do some
Peter Gutmann writes:
"James A. Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>If the optimizer ever optimizes away a write to volatile
>memory, device drivers will fail. Most device drivers are
>written in C. If anyone ever produces a C compiler in which
>"volatile" does not do what we want, not only ar
> A police ministers meeting in Darwin this week
> agreed it was "unacceptable websites advocating or facilitating violent
protest
> action be accessible from Australia".
This is just a CIA psyop to make US look good. USA and China.
=
end
(of original message)
Y-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan
At 10:50 AM -0800 11/7/02, Matt Blaze wrote:
>> At 03:55 PM 11/7/02 +0100, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
>> >Regardless of whether one uses "volatile" or a pragma, the basic point
>> >remains: cryptographic application writers have to be aware of what a
>> >clever compiler can do, so that they know to
At 02:22 PM 11/8/2002 +, Vincent Penquerc'h wrote:
while (!is_all_memory_zero(ptr)) zero_memory(ptr);
Right, unfortunately the compiler might be insightful enough just to
optimize that whole thing to skip() -- Dijkstra's null statement.
Even Welschenbach calls "ispurged" immediately afte
On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 08:35:06AM -0500, Patrick Chkoreff wrote:
> That's an interesting idea. You'd take the pointer returned by alloca and
> pass it to memset. How could the optimizer possibly know that the pointer
With GCC, it's a builtin, so it will know.
> I was thinking the only way to
"James A. Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>If the optimizer ever optimizes away a write to volatile
>memory, device drivers will fail. Most device drivers are
>written in C. If anyone ever produces a C compiler in which
>"volatile" does not do what we want, not only are they out of
>spec, bu
On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 07:36:41PM -0500, Patrick Chkoreff wrote:
> Everybody probably also knows about the gnupg trick, where they define a
> recursive routine called "burn_stack":
[...]
> Then there's the vararg technique discussed in Michael Welschenbach's book
> "Cryptography in C and C++":
David Honig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Wouldn't a crypto coder be using paranoid-programming skills, like
>*checking* that the memory is actually zeroed? (Ie, read it back..)
>I suppose that caching could still deceive you though?
You can't, in general, assume the compiler won't optimise this
At 10:20 AM 11/8/2002 +, Vincent Penquerc'h wrote:
On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 07:36:41PM -0500, Patrick Chkoreff wrote:
> Everybody probably also knows about the gnupg trick, where they define a
> recursive routine called "burn_stack":
[...]
> Then there's the vararg technique discussed in Michae
At 02:22 PM 11/8/2002 +, Vincent Penquerc'h wrote:
On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 08:35:06AM -0500, Patrick Chkoreff wrote:
> That's an interesting idea. You'd take the pointer returned by alloca and
> pass it to memset. How could the optimizer possibly know that the pointer
With GCC, it's a built
Interesting background to the below lawsuit: the plaintiff in question is
about as straight as you can possibly be while still breathing :-) No drugs
*at all*. He's not even into the legal drugs! Nevertheless, he's a long
time GoodGuy, and this is just another example.
Thanks CR!
--
Yours,
13 matches
Mail list logo
