On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Alessandro Ghedini via RT
wrote:
> In any case memset_s is not available anywhere anyway, so that doesn't
> really
>
matter.
>
Is it available in some places, e.g.
https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/Darwin/Reference/ManPages/man3/memset_s.3.ht
On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Alessandro Ghedini via RT
wrote:
> In any case memset_s is not available anywhere anyway, so that doesn't
> really
>
matter.
>
Is it available in some places, e.g.
https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/Darwin/Reference/ManPages/man3/memset_s.3.ht
On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 09:58:50AM -1000, Brian Smith wrote:
> Alessandro Ghedini via RT wrote:
>
> > I was also wondering whether it would make sense to just drop the asm
> > implementations. Does the speed-up justify the added complexity?
> >
>
> IMO, it should work like this:
> * memset_s whe
On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 07:59:03PM +, Brian Smith via RT wrote:
> Alessandro Ghedini via RT wrote:
>
> > I was also wondering whether it would make sense to just drop the asm
> > implementations. Does the speed-up justify the added complexity?
> >
>
> IMO, it should work like this:
> * memse
Alessandro Ghedini via RT wrote:
> I was also wondering whether it would make sense to just drop the asm
> implementations. Does the speed-up justify the added complexity?
>
IMO, it should work like this:
* memset_s when memset_s is available.
* Otherwise, SecureZeroMemory, when SecureZeroMemory
Alessandro Ghedini via RT wrote:
> I was also wondering whether it would make sense to just drop the asm
> implementations. Does the speed-up justify the added complexity?
>
IMO, it should work like this:
* memset_s when memset_s is available.
* Otherwise, SecureZeroMemory, when SecureZeroMemory
On October 31, 2015 2:09:50 PM GMT+01:00, Steve Marquess
wrote:
>On 10/31/2015 09:01 AM, Richard Levitte wrote:
>> Can't recall previous discussions on this, but would it be possible
>to have a FIPS engine?
>
>Of a sort, yes. I'll let Steve Henson speak to the details, but it is
>his hope (and
On 10/31/2015 09:01 AM, Richard Levitte wrote:
> Can't recall previous discussions on this, but would it be possible to have a
> FIPS engine?
Of a sort, yes. I'll let Steve Henson speak to the details, but it is
his hope (and mine) that FIPS module support for 1.1 and beyond would be
modular so
Hi,
in commit 070c233 I didn't notice that the CRYPTO_w_lock()/CRYPTO_w_unlock()
calls are now useless, so I made a patch to fix that.
See the following GitHub pull request:
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/454
Cheers
___
openssl-bugs-mod maili
Hi,
the current platform-generic implementation of OPENSSL_cleanse() is very weird
and IMO overly complex (its initial intent was to cleanse with values other
than 0, but AFAICT none of the asm implementations do it), so I reimplemented
it in a simpler way.
I was also wondering whether it would m
Can't recall previous discussions on this, but would it be possible to have a
FIPS engine?
Cheers
Richard
Steve Marquess skrev: (31 oktober 2015 13:34:33 CET)
>On 10/31/2015 08:26 AM, Alessandro Ghedini via RT wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I don't know what your intentions are with FIPS support in ma
On 10/31/2015 08:26 AM, Alessandro Ghedini via RT wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't know what your intentions are with FIPS support in master, ...
We would like to continue to provide a FIPS validated module for the 1.1
(and subsequent) releases. Unfortunately the current module ("OpenSSL
FIPS Object Modu
Hi,
I don't know what your intentions are with FIPS support in master, but after
the removal of most if the fips/ code, several bits and pieces of now broken
code have remained in the codebase. IMO it'd be better to just remove it for
now.
See the following GitHub pull request:
https://github.com
Hi,
the current Travis CI setup lacks support for proper Windows support, so I
prepared a patch to add configuration for the AppVeyor service [0] which
provides continuous integration on Windows.
See the following GitHub pull request:
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/456
Cheers
[0] http:
Hi,
the current README in master contains a lot of outdated information and some
weird wording, so I prepared a patch to fix it.
See the following GitHub pull request:
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/457
Cheers
___
openssl-bugs-mod mailing lis
15 matches
Mail list logo