From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <oliver@first.in-berlin.de>
X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A51A7EE51
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Fri, 24 May 2013 16:47:08 +0200 (CEST)
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  oliver@first.in-berlin.de) identity=pra;
  client-ip=192.109.42.8;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="oliver@first.in-berlin.de";
  x-sender="oliver@first.in-berlin.de";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  oliver@first.in-berlin.de) identity=mailfrom;
  client-ip=192.109.42.8;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="oliver@first.in-berlin.de";
  x-sender="oliver@first.in-berlin.de";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@einhorn.in-berlin.de) identity=helo;
  client-ip=192.109.42.8;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="oliver@first.in-berlin.de";
  x-sender="postmaster@einhorn.in-berlin.de";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AnICACl8n1HAbSoIlGdsb2JhbABZgziDO7lDhSeBBBYOAQEBAQkLCQkUBCSCIwEBAwIjDwFGEAsJDwICBSECAg8FGDGIIAQIqG6RfBaBEI13B4JBgRMDjweIM5RS
X-IPAS-Result: AnICACl8n1HAbSoIlGdsb2JhbABZgziDO7lDhSeBBBYOAQEBAQkLCQkUBCSCIwEBAwIjDwFGEAsJDwICBSECAg8FGDGIIAQIqG6RfBaBEI13B4JBgRMDjweIM5RS
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,736,1363129200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="15596857"
Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8])
  by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 24 May 2013 16:47:07 +0200
X-Envelope-From: oliver@first.in-berlin.de
Received: from first (e178014212.adsl.alicedsl.de [85.178.14.212])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by einhorn.in-berlin.de (8.13.6/8.13.6/Debian-1) with ESMTP id r4OEl798004956
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT);
	Fri, 24 May 2013 16:47:07 +0200
Received: by first (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id EDF57154066B; Fri, 24 May 2013 16:47:06 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 16:47:06 +0200
From: oliver <oliver@first.in-berlin.de>
To: Francois Berenger <berenger@riken.jp>
Cc: caml-list@inria.fr
Message-ID: <20130524144706.GG2007@siouxsie>
References: <CAC3Lx=aj0HxPYvQKpt2yFzcQMXZOc2NKnB56DezQheMHjUPdag@mail.gmail.com>
 <519F1CF6.7050007@riken.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <519F1CF6.7050007@riken.jp>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang_at_IN-Berlin_e.V. on 192.109.42.8
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] French study on security and functional languages

On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 04:55:34PM +0900, Francois Berenger wrote:
> On 05/24/2013 04:02 PM, David MENTRE wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >For those reading French, ANSSI (French agency for information
> >security) published a study on security and functional languages, with
> >a set of recommendations. OCaml is apparently well studied:
> >   http://www.ssi.gouv.fr/fr/anssi/publications/publications-scientifiques/autres-publications/lafosec-securite-et-langages-fonctionnels.html
> 
> The document "État des lieux des langages fonctionnels"
> is interesting even out of the context of computer security.
> 
> http://www.ssi.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/LaFoSec_-_Etat_des_lieux_des_langages_fonctionnels.pdf
> 
> PS: and, most importantly, page 55 gives good marks to OCaml
>     compared to other languages (so that we can start to troll now) :-)
[...]

What about Haskell?
Did it "perform" well?


Ciao,
   Oliver