> From: openssl-users [mailto:openssl-users-boun...@openssl.org] On Behalf Of > Salz, Rich via openssl-users > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2018 11:28
> > I never thought I'd see the day that someone would have to defend not > > leaking memory > > in pivotal security code like openssl however > To be accurate, it was a couple of people saying that memory leaks *on > process exit* aren’t be a big deal. And only singleton leaks, at that. But why sweat comprehension when there's an opportunity to be rude? As for Jordan's objection: If you don't know the source of your "leaks", then I can't say I'm particularly impressed with a zero-"leak" policy. That amounts to "let's burn a lot of cycles during process termination, rather than understand what we're doing". -- Michael Wojcik Distinguished Engineer, Micro Focus -- openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
