>>> I don't think there's any taboo or a strong opposition against the >>> patch. It's just that Andy hasn't followed up, I sort of given up and >>> moved to other projects and the whole thing has gone forgotten. >> Ok. I hope after my re-merge and testing we can get it integrated this >> time. > > BTW, my memory is vague here, is this Padlock block only able to do one-shot > hashing?
Yes, but a technique bypassing this limitation was proposed and proven to work (as per end of SHA1 thread mentioned earlier). Technique involved crashing of hashing instruction into non-accessible page. And that was what I wanted to pursue, but never got time to. Which is why there was no real follow-up:-( For reference, the plan was to setup intermediate buffer followed by non-accessible page upon engine setup, i.e. once, and then serialize access to it with thread synchronizing primitives. I reckon that serializing threads is OK, because system is more likely to starve for data than for hashing compute power (1Gbps NIC vs. ~2Gbps hashing rate). A. ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
