logoalt Hacker News

pizzafeelsright • today at 12:38 AM • 3 replies • view on HN

This flows.

All of human knowledge, experience, distilled down to idempotent instructions and code for specific tasks, functions, situations is fully testable against a near infinite amount of fuzz and attacks.

We do not question the strength of steel if properly treated.

Code is no different. We will enter the point where code is finally trusted as a carabiner and rope for the life of a climber.


Replies

joshAg • today at 1:32 AM

This doesn't follow. We've had code as trusted as that for _decades_. Common criteria and EAL was certified at the end of the 20th century. Before that there was the rainbow series in the US dating back to the 1980s [1].

It's absolutely cool to see this sort of validation process get cheaper and easier, but it means nothing if no one cares enough to do it. EAL1 certification can be as cheap as a beefy server, but it's not commonly done because effectively no one cares.

As microsoft learned with the zune just because it's cheaper or better at the same price doesn't mean anyone will use it. Culturally, we have to make the effort of verifying code worth it.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_Series

Stitch4223 • today at 1:03 AM

Code needs to run on physical devices, which are prone to undervolting, bit flips, hardware bugs in specific batches, radiation, deterioration, and the like.

Preferably, I wouldn’t trust my life to a calculating device running on AA batteries while dangling from a rope.

➕ show 1 reply
3dd3ee • today at 12:39 AM

[flagged]

➕ show 1 reply