Is no-one interested at all about this problem? Or do I need to send it to another place?
Regards, John. From: openssl-users [mailto:openssl-users-boun...@openssl.org] On Behalf Of John Unsworth Sent: 10 April 2015 14:54 To: openssl-users@openssl.org Subject: Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL 1.0.2 Solaris 32 bit build is broken I have compiled 1.0.1m in the same way and that works fine using asm. John. From: openssl-users [mailto:openssl-users-boun...@openssl.org] On Behalf Of John Unsworth Sent: 10 April 2015 12:21 To: openssl-users@openssl.org Subject: [openssl-users] OpenSSL 1.0.2 Solaris 32 bit build is broken I have an application that runs quite happily using OpenSSL 1.0.1h on Solaris 32 bit. I want to upgrade but both 1.0.2 and 1.0.2a cause problems. 1 When building 1.0.2 using ./Configure solaris-sparcv9-cc no-shared -m32 -xcode=pic32 -xldscope=hidden openssl s_client crashes on start: -bash-3.00$ ./openssl s_client -connect eos.es.cpth.ie:4250 Segmentation Fault (core dumped) -bash-3.00$ pstack core core 'core' of 468: ./openssl s_client -connect eos.es.cpth.ie:4250 000e9ce8 sha1_block_data_order (2ed490, 2ed4ec, 4, ffbfebc0, ffbfebc4, 44) + 8 00226140 ssleay_rand_add (ffbfecbc, 1, 20, ffbfeb94, 0, 14) + 530 00227028 RAND_poll (4, ffbfeca8, ffbfecc8, ffbfecc8, 2c0630, 2c0624) + 38c 00226be0 ssleay_rand_status (c734, 0, 2b9f5c, 2c05ac, 2a0e50, 13000) + 138 00065eb4 app_RAND_load_file (ffbfefc0, 2d5218, 1, 2800, 0, 1) + 88 0004d784 s_client_main (0, c00, 0, c00, 2b4adc, 2f4380) + 5c94 0001328c do_cmd (2eb4c8, 3, ffbffa88, 2b4738, 13e64, 2b3e78) + b8 00012f08 main (4, ffbffa84, 2eb4c8, 2a0000, 2b3e78, 2b4adc) + 3a4 00012a08 _start (0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2b3e78) + 108 2 So I then rebuilt adding no-asm flag. It manages to connect but negotiation fails with an error: 4280581268:error:140943FC:SSL routines:ssl3_read_bytes:sslv3 alert bad record mac:s3_pkt.c:1456:SSL alert number 20 4280581268:error:140790E5:SSL routines:ssl23_write:ssl handshake failure:s23_lib.c:177: This is against the server that is still running 1.0.1h and can be successfully connected with openssl built with 1.0.1h. Note that the 64 bit build seems to work perfectly. Unfortunately for historical reasons we need to use the 32 bit version. The 32 bit builds that we use on Windows and Linux also work perfectly. Is it something to do with byte order? Regards, John.
_______________________________________________ openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
