re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013.html#27 Java Security?

for a long time the majority of exploits used buffer length related
vulnerabilities that have been epidemic in C-language implemented
applications & systems.

Note that the previously mentioned mainframe Pascal was eventually
released as product and was used to implement IBM's original mainframe
tcp/ip product. There were some performance issues with the base product
... however there was *never* any buffer length related
vulnerabilties. As to the performance issues, I did the changes to
support RFC1044 and in some tests at cray research between cray and 4341
got channel speed sustained throughput using only modest amount of 4341
processor time (aka possibly a factor of 500 times improvement in bytes
moved per instruction executed over the base product).

I then had to do both detailed failure mode and detailed vulnerability
analaysis when we were doing IBM's ha/cmp product ... some past posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hacmp

C-language related buffer length problems continued to be the major
source of exploits up through the late 90s. By 2004 that had shifted to
approx. 1/3rd buffer length, 1/3rd client-side downloaded executable
code, and 1/3rd social engineering. I did some work on the mitre exploit
database trying to further work on my merged security taxonomy &
glossory ... post attempting to characterize all exploits:
http://wwwg.garlic.com/~lynn/2004e.html#43 security taxonomy and CVE

part of the issue was (at the time) exploit reports were free text ... I
talked to mitre about possibly introducing a little more structure and
categories ... but they said that it was hard enough to get the reports
as free text w/o trying to enforce structure.

lots of past posts pontificating about the buffer length vulnerability
issue http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subintegrity.html#buffer

trivia ... relationship between ha/cmp, supercomputers and electronic
commerce ... old reference to early jan92 meeting in ellison's
conference room on ha/cmp cluster scaleup
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/95.html#13

at the end of jan, the scaleup work was transferred and a couple weeks
later announced as supercomputer (and we were told we couldn't work on
anything with more than four processors). this contributed to our
decision to leave. not long later, two of the other people in the
ellison meeting also leave and show up at a small client/server start
responsible for something called the "commerce server". as mentioned in
previous post, we are brought in as consultants because they want to do
payment transactions on their server.

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to