> This also puts into question the no_df tests in test/drbgtest.c, how
> can we possibly, under the diverse conditions we're facing, assume to
> know if those tests will succeed or fail?

The no_df tests are o.k. as they are. In fact, OpenSSL supports using the DRBG 
with or without the derivation function. We ourselves, we are not using the 
no_df feature. But that does not mean we have to rip it out of our sources. 
It's there since FIPS 2.0 and it's implemented correctly. A possible use case 
would be the following: if an application has access to a true RNG then it 
could replace the get_entropy() callbacks and operate our DRBG without the 
derivation function. 

> So I guess I'm still on track with wanting to specify a get_nonce
> function for VMS.  Speaking of that, got any ideas on how to hook that
> on appropriately, without butchering the current DRBG code?

Hold the line, I'm currently working on it...  


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

openssl-project mailing list

Reply via email to