Lutz Jaenicke wrote:
> Peter Waltenberg wrote:
>
>> Yes, it's desirable that that data is "unknown" however there is a
>> compromise possible:
>> Complement the area. It'll mean valgrind will only complain at the correct
>> place, or possibly not at all, and it's still random. The performance hit
>> from doing that will be so small it won't matter.
>>
>> This annoyed me as well - the big advantage of valgrind is that it doesn't
>> require recompilation to work and it's really good if you don't have to
>> wade through all the flase alarms before you can find the real problems.
>>
>>
> Not being a valgrind user... I do not see that leaving this area
> uninitialized will
> give us some cryptographically useful amount of entropy so that we could
> as well memset it to 0...
>
Ok, I have just applied the patch to 0.9.8-stable and 0.9.9-dev.
Best regards,
Lutz
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
