In article <20120830121650.5695217...@cvs.netbsd.org>, Matthias Drochner <source-changes-d@NetBSD.org> wrote: >-=-=-=-=-=- > >Module Name: src >Committed By: drochner >Date: Thu Aug 30 12:16:49 UTC 2012 > >Modified Files: > src/include: string.h > src/lib/libc/string: Makefile.inc > src/lib/libcrypt: bcrypt.c crypt-sha1.c md5crypt.c > src/sys/dev: cgd_crypto.c > src/sys/lib/libkern: Makefile.libkern libkern.h > src/sys/netipsec: key.c xform_ah.c xform_esp.c > src/sys/opencrypto: cryptosoft.c >Added Files: > src/common/lib/libc/string: consttime_bcmp.c explicit_bzero.c > >Log Message: >Add "consttime_bcmp" and "explicit_bzero" functions for both kernel >abd userland, as proposed on tech-security, with explicit_bzero using >a volatile function pointer as suggested by Alan Barrett. >Both do what the name says. For userland, both are prefixed by "__" >to keep them out of the user namespace. >Change some memset/memcmp uses to the new functions where it makes >sense -- these are just some examples, more to come.
I would prefer not to proliferate the b* function names in the future. Why not explicit_memset() consttime_memcmp()? It is not like the old b* functions have clear semantics or consistent prototypes! christos