Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 25 Apr 2014 23:04:32 +0200
From:      =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
To:        freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: OpenSSL static analysis, was: De Raadt + FBSD + OpenSSH + hole?
Message-ID:  <86iopxm87z.fsf@nine.des.no>
In-Reply-To: <20140425175056.GA8508@glaze.hydra> (Chad Perrin's message of "Fri, 25 Apr 2014 11:50:56 -0600")
References:  <DC2F9726-881B-4D42-879F-61377CA0210D@mac.com> <8783.1398202137@server1.tristatelogic.com> <20140423003400.GA8271@glaze.hydra> <20140423010054.2891E143D098@rock.dv.isc.org> <20140423012206.GB8271@glaze.hydra> <86bnvpoav7.fsf@nine.des.no> <CAG5KPzyTCTbe_vTcP8HDa_KU0agNZQjzVmQ4XnZZjgGFEVnyaQ@mail.gmail.com> <86zjj9mivi.fsf@nine.des.no> <20140425175056.GA8508@glaze.hydra>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Chad Perrin <code@apotheon.net> writes:
> Do you claim that the Clang static analyzer is essentially worthless for
> finding and fixing security-related bugs because it is more trouble to
> make use of its output than its output is worth, or does it only *seem*
> like that is your claim?

All I was saying is that 70% of this thread is pointless and that some
of the most active participants are talking out of their asses.

I won't address the wall of text in your previous reply except to note
that you misrepresented my position and argued against a claim I never
made.

DES
--=20
Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86iopxm87z.fsf>