Lutz Jaenicke wrote: > Peter Waltenberg wrote: > >> Yes, it's desirable that that data is "unknown" however there is a >> compromise possible: >> Complement the area. It'll mean valgrind will only complain at the correct >> place, or possibly not at all, and it's still random. The performance hit >> from doing that will be so small it won't matter. >> >> This annoyed me as well - the big advantage of valgrind is that it doesn't >> require recompilation to work and it's really good if you don't have to >> wade through all the flase alarms before you can find the real problems. >> >> > Not being a valgrind user... I do not see that leaving this area > uninitialized will > give us some cryptographically useful amount of entropy so that we could > as well memset it to 0... >
Ok, I have just applied the patch to 0.9.8-stable and 0.9.9-dev. Best regards, Lutz ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]