closing as requested by OP
--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4566
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
Close. It looks like it was cleared with Commit
5ec84dd75f7965942a55ef5382aa34b8417336c5.
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> Just pulled latest source (Camellia changes):
>
> $ git rev-parse HEAD
> 96d06c213d5a2c1af42dd3b5d7bcc4a65df90738
>
> Config OK,
fixed in master with commit b4b576d thanks!
--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3454
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
No, I didn't create an exploit.
If the number of packets is limited to something that small, there won't be an
issue.
It still seems like pqueue out to be excised from the source base and replace
with something simpler.
Regards,
Pauli
--
Oracle
Dr Paul Dale | Cryptographer | Network
Apologies for the delay before responding.
I believe we have fixed that by replacing 'chomp' with 's|\R$||' in the master
branch.
It this is still an issue, please open a new ticket.
Cheers,
Richard
On Mon Mar 30 07:51:29 2015, esado...@eniks.com wrote:
> It is well known issue with build on
Ah, the endless confusion of cipher vs signature NID's :)
closing ticket.
--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3922
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
We don't have SH hardware, and the MIPS code is already more improved. Sorry we
took so long to get to this.
--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=2337
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe:
This works.
Code compiles fine now, using openssl-1.0.2h.tar.gz and
openssl-fips-ecp-2.0.10.tar.gz, and all FIPS self-tests complete with 0 errors.
-Original Message-
From: Andy Polyakov via RT [mailto:r...@openssl.org]
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 5:46 AM
To: Stuart Kemp
Just pulled latest source (Camellia changes):
$ git rev-parse HEAD
96d06c213d5a2c1af42dd3b5d7bcc4a65df90738
Config OK, Make fails at. Verified twice:
SHOBJECTS="./libcrypto.a "; ( :;LIBDEPS="${LIBDEPS:--lresolv
-lsocket -lnsl -ldl}"; SHAREDCMD="${SHAREDCMD:-gcc}";
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Matt Caswell via RT wrote:
> On Wed Jun 01 22:20:38 2016, matt wrote:
>> Hi Jeff
>>
>> Please could you try the attached patch?
>
>
> Jeff confirmed to me that the patch solved the problem. Pushed as commit
> 25b9d11c0.
Confirmed.
Its a good,
sorry to take so long to look at this. believe fixed in 1.1. open a new ticket
if not.
--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=2969
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe:
sorry to take so long to look at this. believe fixed in 1.1. open a new ticket
if not.
--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=2969
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe:
Since moving to the OpenSSL 1.0.1+ series, we've been experiencing sporadic
deadlocks in OpenLDAP inside of OpenSSL. I'm not sure exactly when the
problem was introduced, but we never encountered it with the 1.0.0 series,
and 1.0.1j was what we moved to when we switched to the 1.0.1 series.
Fixed in commit e70656cf1c.
Closing ticket.
Matt
--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=597
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
On Wed Jun 01 22:20:38 2016, matt wrote:
> Hi Jeff
>
> Please could you try the attached patch?
Jeff confirmed to me that the patch solved the problem. Pushed as commit
25b9d11c0.
Closing ticket.
Matt
--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4434
Please log in as guest
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 4:04 AM Matt Caswell via RT wrote:
> On Thu Jun 02 23:24:44 2016, paul.d...@oracle.com wrote:
> > The DTLS packet reassembly code has a performance problem that could
> > result in a DoS attack being possible.
> >
> >
> >
> > The DTLS packet reassembly
Sorry for the delay in looking at this. It appears that the function has
evolved quite a bit, and I cannot find a code path where cpk is not set. If i'm
wrong, please re-open the ticket with some more info. Thanks.
--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3680
Please log in
OP says it can be closed, so we will. Open a new PR if desired.
--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3723
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
commit beb4c45c the if() test could be removed since that code is inside a
larger "if (cipher" block, but this is minimal.
--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4560
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe:
yeah, about time we fixed this. :) commit a7be575 in master. thanks.
--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3809
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
bn_add.c was modernized in
https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=7d6284057b66458f6c99bd65ba67377d63411090
and suggested modifications were "accumulated". Case is being dismissed.
--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3100
Please log in as guest with
My claim about portability issues was wrong (sorry): The C-standard ensures
that positive values are handled in the two's complement system, indeed.
However, inl % block_size == inl & (block_size-1) is true if and only if
block_size is a power of two, which happens to be true under the current
On Wed Jun 08 16:02:39 2016, matt wrote:
> On Tue May 24 13:53:07 2016, steve wrote:
> > On Sun Feb 21 13:55:35 2016, rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
> > > Running the Apache test suite for Apache 2.4 with OpenSSL 1.1.0
> > > adjustments, I get
> > >
> >
> > Can you please check to see if this
On Thu Jun 02 23:24:44 2016, paul.d...@oracle.com wrote:
> The DTLS packet reassembly code has a performance problem that could
> result in a DoS attack being possible.
>
>
>
> The DTLS packet reassembly uses the data structure defined in
> ssl/pqueue.c for the purpose (it is the only user of this
Am 2016-06-12 um 23:49 schrieb Rich Salz via RT:
> And DANE support is in 1.1/master.
>
Ok, thanks; will have to upgrade ...
--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3236
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe:
25 matches
Mail list logo