On 04/11/15 15:30, David Benjamin via RT wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 7:04 AM Matt Caswell via RT wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 03/11/15 17:43, David Benjamin via RT wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not sure that fix quite works though. If BIO_flush completes
>>> asynchronously
>>
>> Ahhh, yes good point. Updated p
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 7:04 AM Matt Caswell via RT wrote:
>
>
> On 03/11/15 17:43, David Benjamin via RT wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure that fix quite works though. If BIO_flush completes
> > asynchronously
>
> Ahhh, yes good point. Updated patch attached.
>
> > (hrm, it's missing an rwstate update),
On 03/11/15 17:43, David Benjamin via RT wrote:
> I'm not sure that fix quite works though. If BIO_flush completes
> asynchronously
Ahhh, yes good point. Updated patch attached.
> (hrm, it's missing an rwstate update),
Yes, just discovered that myself and then came back and reread your
email
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 12:42 PM David Benjamin wrote:
> I'm not sure that fix quite works though. If BIO_flush completes
> asynchronously (hrm, it's missing an rwstate update), then I believe you'll
> be in a state where you *do* want to repeat the init_off / init_num adjust.
> You might be able
On 03/11/15 18:28, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 04:16:37PM +, Matt Caswell via RT wrote:
>
>> One other related point is that fragmenting ClientHellos is probably a
>> bad idea. The whole ClientHello/HelloVerifyRequest mechanism is meant to
>> be implemented without stori
On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 04:16:37PM +, Matt Caswell via RT wrote:
> One other related point is that fragmenting ClientHellos is probably a
> bad idea. The whole ClientHello/HelloVerifyRequest mechanism is meant to
> be implemented without storing state on the server. That isn't possible
> if yo
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 11:16 AM Matt Caswell via RT wrote:
> Whilst investigating this I noticed another bug which is actually
> probably more significant. My eyeball only look at the BoringSSL source
> suggests that it is there too, so I'm not sure why you haven't seen it
> in the test that you
Hi David
On 03/11/15 01:58, David Benjamin via RT wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> We found a small DTLS bug while writing some tests. I think it affects
> 1.0.1 and 1.0.2 too, so I thought I'd send you a note. (Note sure about
> master. I'm unfamiliar with the new state machine mechanism.)
>
> In DTLS,
Hi David,
On 03/11/15 01:58, David Benjamin via RT wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> We found a small DTLS bug while writing some tests. I think it affects
> 1.0.1 and 1.0.2 too, so I thought I'd send you a note. (Note sure about
> master. I'm unfamiliar with the new state machine mechanism.)
Just from lo
Hey folks,
We found a small DTLS bug while writing some tests. I think it affects
1.0.1 and 1.0.2 too, so I thought I'd send you a note. (Note sure about
master. I'm unfamiliar with the new state machine mechanism.)
In DTLS, each ClientHello is supposed to reset the handshake hash (in case
of Hel
10 matches
Mail list logo