Hacker News Reader

This will be very good for the code. Attacking it will only make it stronger.

Correct. Also claiming that it's mildly secure is also inviting hackers. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

There must be something in between right? Like... "secure"? Claiming "hacker-proof" isn't just an invitation, it's a challenge. Nothing triggers people like telling them something is %-proof.

The mathematical proof might be 100% solid and hacker proof. The implementation will probably never be.

> The mathematical proof might be 100% solid and hacker proof. The implementation will probably never be.

I agree, I see a few ways that it could go wrong:

- Code is proven correct against the specification, but specification is wrong/buggy

- source code is correct/secure, but compiler is overzealous and botch the securities guarantees.

- someone just outright botches the implementation. Heartbleed wound up in OpenSSL for years before anyone noticed.

"Our very strength incites challenge. Challenge incites conflict. And conflict breeds catastrophe."

Oracle Unbreakable* Linux

*for certain definitions of 'unbreakable'