[C-safe-secure-studygroup] Bounds-checked interfaces

Clive Pygott clivepygott at gmail.com
Thu Jan 17 09:24:29 GMT 2019

I think I'd like to see what it is I'm supposed to have said, before you
start something as 'Clive says...'!

What is recognized is that if something has been working for sometime
without issues, its a bad idea to force it to be changed to meet some new
standard, usually known as 'grandfather rights'.


On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 6:46 PM Robert Seacord <rcseacord at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm working on a paper on bounds-checked interfaces that I'm going to
> solicit reviewers for soon.
> Meanwhile, I've heard Clive defend the following principle:
> This is a widely-held expert view that changes to “working code” only
> increase the opportunities to inject new defects.  This view has even been
> expressed by the safety-critical community.
> I'm wondering if there is an authoritative source I could reference on
> this claim?
> I'm tempted just to write "Clive says...."  ;^)
> Thanks,
> rCs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.trustable.io/pipermail/c-safe-secure-studygroup/attachments/20190117/8f3ff982/attachment.html>

More information about the C-safe-secure-studygroup mailing list