On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 01:03:23PM +0200, Liviu Ionescu wrote:
> > 3. I suggest to refrain from using MD5 hashes for anything, as they're
> > considered to be insecure since long;
> 
> right. do you have a specific suggestion? I wouldn't go for very
> complicated cryptographic tools only to check the integrity of some
> files, job that some time ago was successfully performed by a simple
> checksum.

I would suggest SHA256 as output by sha256sum which should be
available on all reasonably modern systems. The idea to use a crypto
hash instead of a simple checksum is to ensure that one is downloading
the original files and not some tampered trojaned version from a
e.g. a MITM attacker.

> > 4. An interesting new option provided by current libusb release on
> > Windows is the usbdk backend which allows one to use vendor jlink
> > drivers (or vendor ftdi drivers etc) with any libusb application,
> > including OpenOCD. You might want to consider giving it a go.
> 
> thank you, I personally do not use windows at all, but, if you want,
> we can add a paragraph to the blog post announcing this new feature,
> and possibly other features.

I'm not using windows too so I have no first-hand experience here. I
know libusb got a configure-time switch to use the usbdk backend and
it's binary-compatible with a regular winusb libusb.

-- 
Be free, use free (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) software!
mailto:[email protected]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
OpenOCD-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openocd-devel

Reply via email to