From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [50.116.15.146]) by inbox.vuxu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1597721570 for ; Mon, 20 May 2024 22:11:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7E5643B61; Tue, 21 May 2024 06:11:33 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mcvoy.com (mcvoy.com [192.169.23.250]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E12D43B5D for ; Tue, 21 May 2024 06:11:25 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mcvoy.com (Postfix, from userid 3546) id BEDFA35E919; Mon, 20 May 2024 13:11:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 13:11:22 -0700 From: Larry McVoy To: John Levine Message-ID: <20240520201122.GC27662@mcvoy.com> References: <20240520200226.80F428B9493A@ary.qy> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240520200226.80F428B9493A@ary.qy> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Message-ID-Hash: UAWW7CVZJVUJT4JRPIVBO5WKLNO4PFRO X-Message-ID-Hash: UAWW7CVZJVUJT4JRPIVBO5WKLNO4PFRO X-MailFrom: lm@mcvoy.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: tuhs@tuhs.org, benjamin.p.kallus.gr@dartmouth.edu X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1 Precedence: list Subject: [TUHS] Re: OT: LangSec (Re: A fuzzy awk.) List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 04:02:26PM -0400, John Levine wrote: > It appears that Ben Kallus said: > >> It may become hard to reconcile this with the robustness principle > >> (Be conservative in what you send, be liberal in what you accept) > >> that Jon Postel popularized. Maybe it becomes necessary, though. > > > >Yes; the LangSec people essentially reject the robustness principle. > > > >See https://langsec.org/papers/postel-patch.pdf > > On the contrary, they actually understand it. > > Postel was widely misunderstood to say that you should try to accept > arbitrary garbage. People who knew him tell me that he meant to be > liberal when the spec is ambiguous, not to allow stuff that is just > wrong. As their quote from RFC 1122 points out, he also said you > should be prepared for arbitrary garbage so you can reject it. Yeah, I read the pdf and I took away the same thing as John. -- --- Larry McVoy Retired to fishing http://www.mcvoy.com/lm/boat