3 ms·
Yes we do. The NSA publishes the future security standards that defense, aviation, banking, and government institute have to take into account. Once the NSA bac
by xphos 4y ago
Yes we do. The NSA publishes the future security standards that defense, aviation, banking, and government institute have to take into account. Once the NSA backs the technology it's generates the government push to get NIST to push a standards update for government contracts specs, which yields better security in the long run. It' silly but that's how change is implemented in government it's slow but eventually it forces adoption of better standards.
- rudolph9 4y agoThis.
- alexfromapex 4y agoI might be the only one but I found it annoying that the NSA article seemingly chose to only omit Rust in the list of examples in the Path Forward section, after having mentioned it as an example of a memory-safe language earlier.
- wellareyousure 4y agoI don’t think the guys in India Japan and China who write the C++ code in the games and apps I use for the pay the offshorers want to pay are going to give a fuck.
- fragmede 4y agoAs an example, it was NIST that recommended password rotation every X days (note: they no longer do), and from there every one else decided to implement that password requirement in so many corporate workplaces. It wasn't a requirement that came up out of thin air.
- nintendo1889 4y agoLol let's hear what Satoshi nakamoto has to say about this! (Bip39 phrases)
- le-mark 4y agoThe curious thing is the DoD funded development of a memory safe language in the 80s which they then didn’t use. Ada has memory safety built in.
- jabl 4y agoWasn't safety critical DoD projects (like military avionics projects) required to be implemented in Ada at some point. But at some point that requirement was rescinded and Ada all but died. Seems nowadays Ada is more alive in Europe, many European safety critical projects done with SPARK?