You write:
>On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 03:06:38PM -0000, Charles Bryant wrote:
(Someone wrote):
>> >How did you find that
>> >bn_mul_comba4 is broken?
>>
>> I fed various random inputs into both the C and assembler versions and
>> compared them. I think bntest also fails because of this bug
>
>I see no failures in the regression tests for the Debian package.
>So I'm guessing that it's not really covered by the regression
>tests, and I don't really see it in bntest either.
I tried bntest again and it passed even with the bug present, so I must have
made a mistake the first time (quite possible as it's quite complicated
running the test on my test platform).
A good test for this bug is to ask bn_mul_comba4 to multiply
0x00000001 0x00000002 0x00000003 0x00000004
by 0x00000010 0x00000020 0x00000030 0x00000040
as the error is then immediately obvious by the irregularity in the result
even if you haven't worked out what it should be.
--
Charles Bryant - [email protected]
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [email protected]
Automated List Manager [email protected]
