this is already fixed in the cvs. Please try a recent snapshot.
Cheers,
Nils
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Nothing to see here...move on...move on
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated List Manager
wrote:
I have founded a bug in openssl 0.9.8.a!
when used EVP_des_ede3_cbc algorithm
used
EVP_DecryptInit(KCtx-ctx, KCtx-enc, KCtx-keystr, KCtx-iv);
EVP_DecryptUpdate(KCtx-ctx, pbData, (int *)pdwDataLen, p, len);
EVP_DecryptUpdate(KCtx-ctx, pbData, (int *)pdwDataLen, p, len);
wrote:
I have founded a bug in openssl 0.9.8.a!
when used EVP_des_ede3_cbc algorithm
used
EVP_DecryptInit(KCtx-ctx, KCtx-enc, KCtx-keystr, KCtx-iv);
EVP_DecryptUpdate(KCtx-ctx, pbData, (int *)pdwDataLen, p, len);
EVP_DecryptUpdate(KCtx-ctx, pbData, (int *)pdwDataLen, p, len);
Michael McDougall wrote:
diff -ur openssl-SNAP-20060415/crypto/aes/aes_cfb.c
openssl-SNAP-20060415.changed/crypto/aes/aes_cfb.c
--- openssl-SNAP-20060415/crypto/aes/aes_cfb.c2004-12-30
06:00:14.0 -0500
+++ openssl-SNAP-20060415.changed/crypto/aes/aes_cfb.c
When I run the the openssl evptest suite in purify runtime memory usage
analysis tool
it reports lots of memory segment errors in the AES crypto functions.
If I build openssl with AES assembler code disabled (e.i AES in c-code)
the same test
runs without any errors from purify.
The test was
Hi,
I've just tried compiling OpenSSL-0.9.8a for HPPA64 architecture
(using gcc-4.1) and 'make test' ends with
...
ecb idea ok
cbc idea ok
cfb64 idea ok
../util/shlib_wrap.sh ./shatest
*** Termination signal 139
Stop.
*** Error exit code 1
Stop.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I've just tried compiling OpenSSL-0.9.8a for HPPA64 architecture
(using gcc-4.1) and 'make test' ends with
...
ecb idea ok
cbc idea ok
cfb64 idea ok
../util/shlib_wrap.sh ./shatest
*** Termination signal 139
Stop.
*** Error exit code 1
Stop.
Hi Andy,
I'm sorry for such a late reply ;-) I didn't have the hardware available
during past few months and only got it up and running again recently.
BTW, have you considered synergetic implementation, which would work as
following. Arrange an intermediate buffer followed by non-accessible
