Thank god... On Oct 30, 2012 7:50 AM, "Ben Laurie" <b...@links.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Patrick Mylund Nielsen > <cryptogra...@patrickmylund.com> wrote: > > I would be happy to volunteer to move everything to Github. But it > really is > > really, really easy to do, and the maintenance required is minimal. That > or > > git+redmine or git+JIRA would be my suggestion. > > The team has ruled out having the master at github. > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Ben Laurie <b...@links.org> wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Matthew Green <matthewdgr...@gmail.com > > > >> wrote: > >> > So: > >> > > >> > 1. What is the process by which you get OpenSSL contributors to > notice a > >> > serious issue and apply a patch? > >> > >> I wouldn't know, I haven't tried :-) > >> > >> In my case, just ask (me, that is, not some mailing list). If the > >> issue is serious, I will likely apply the patch. > >> > >> > 2. What are the criteria for applying a patch? Is it just 'whatever > >> > interests the devs'? It seems that publishing an exploit works, but > is that > >> > necessary? > >> > >> I think it can be taken as read that the devs are interested in the > >> security and stability of OpenSSL. > >> > >> > 3. It's 2012 -- why the **** is OpenSSL running its own ticket tracker > >> > and source control servers??? (RT is a disaster.) > >> > >> Damn good question. Probably because we don't have a volunteer to move > >> everything somewhere else and keep it running. > >> > >> > 4. What does it take to become an OpenSSL volunteer? > >> > >> :-) Like most (good) open source projects: sustained contribution. > >> > >> > > >> > Matt > >> > > >> > On Oct 30, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Ben Laurie <b...@links.org> wrote: > >> > > >> >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Jeffrey Walton <noloa...@gmail.com > > > >> >> wrote: > >> >>> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 5:03 AM, Ben Laurie <b...@links.org> wrote: > >> >>>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Jeffrey Walton < > noloa...@gmail.com> > >> >>>> wrote: > >> >>>>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 2:29 PM, John Case <c...@sdf.org> wrote: > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> [SNIP] > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Apparently you think the best way to get a secure platform is to > >> >>>> apply > >> >>>> pressure through pointless security standards. I'd suggest your > >> >>>> efforts might be better spent supplying patches instead. Or, > y'know, > >> >>>> talking to the authors of the s/w in question. You never know, they > >> >>>> might care. > >> >>> Ah, OK. My bad. > >> >>> > >> >>> I've tried supplying patches and filing bug report/enhancement > >> >>> requests. > >> >>> > >> >>> Here was a gentle patch for spelling corrections in a README - > >> >>> rejected. > >> >>> > http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?user=guest&pass=guest&id=2401. > >> >> > >> >> AFAICS that is not rejected, it is ignored. There's a difference. > >> >> > >> >> Also, your patch appears to be reversed. Or your spelling is terrible > >> >> :-) > >> >> > >> >>> Here was a patch for Xcode awareness - rejected (is it fair to say > >> >>> when its sites for years without acknowledgement?). > >> >>> > >> >>> > http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?user=guest&pass=guest&id=2402. > >> >> > >> >> Also not rejected. > >> >> > >> >> Now, I agree that having patches ignored isn't so great either, but > >> >> the problem is: > >> >> > >> >> * RT doesn't actually work, the guy who allegedly maintains our > >> >> infrastructure doesn't, and the team can't agree what to do about it > >> >> (not that its tried very hard). > >> >> > >> >> * OpenSSL is mostly maintained by volunteers, who may not have felt > >> >> particularly inspired by your patches, or may just have missed them. > >> >> > >> >> * When people are paid, they're generally paid to do specific things, > >> >> not to trawl through RT (if they even could) looking for patches to > >> >> adopt. I'm sure someone could pay for that if they want to, though. > >> >> > >> >> * CVS is a shit tool, too, making it hard to deal with patches - > we've > >> >> even agreed as a team to move off it, but see above about > >> >> infrastructure :-) > >> >> > >> >>> I can't locate a bug report on the use of the uninitialized data. > >> >>> Perhaps I had the discussion on the developer's mailing list (I know > >> >>> I'm not imagining it, so my apologies). > >> >>> > >> >>> I am also aware that patches existed for some time for CCM mode, GCM > >> >>> mode, and SRP. In the case of GCM, IBM supplied the patches 5 or 10 > >> >>> years earlier. None were acted upon. > >> >> > >> >> It always amuses me when bigcorp pays to have a patch made, but > >> >> somehow manages to fail to understand that the guy applying the patch > >> >> has to eat, too. Plus, ISTR the IP situation is none too clear on all > >> >> of these. > >> >> > >> >> This reminds me of the first attempt to FIPSify OpenSSL, where there > >> >> was zero budget for the developer - just money for test labs and the > >> >> like ("what do you mean you want money to work on it? I thought it > was > >> >> free software!"). > >> >> > >> >>> The project does not appear to want outside help. If I am drawing > the > >> >>> wrong conclusion, please forgive me. > >> >> > >> >> I'll grant you that your very small patches could be considered help, > >> >> and it is a little unfortunate they they were ignored, but like I > say, > >> >> RT is a shit tool, at least as implemented at OpenSSL, as is CVS (I > >> >> notice you didn't supply the needed 4 patches, just a single one) and > >> >> no-one's paying anyone to pick patches up from it, particularly. > >> >> > >> >> The rest of your "help" appears to be specifying flags you'd like to > >> >> be used and expecting us to do the work for you. Which I actually > >> >> might, I find that kind of thing therapeutic, but you get my point. > >> >> > >> >> I think the project would welcome help - but it needs to be useful > help > >> >> :-) > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> cryptography mailing list > >> >> cryptography@randombit.net > >> >> http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> cryptography mailing list > >> cryptography@randombit.net > >> http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography > > > > > _______________________________________________ > cryptography mailing list > cryptography@randombit.net > http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography >
_______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
