Still exactly the same crash. And even if these assembly code problems can be fixed there is still the negotiation error after compiling with no-asm.
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: John. From: openssl-users [mailto:openssl-users-boun...@openssl.org] On Behalf Of John Foley Sent: 15 April 2015 16:45 To: openssl-users@openssl.org Subject: Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL 1.0.2 Solaris 32 bit build is broken Looks like the crash is in SHA-512 this time, not SHA-1. There's a separate perl script to generate that assembly code. Try the 1.0.1 version of sha512-sparcv9.pl. The output from your rand command is valid. You can use the -base64 option if you want something more readable. On 04/15/2015 11:13 AM, John Unsworth wrote: That seems to have fixed the crash. -bash-3.00$ ./openssl rand 64 zÔòMÉÜOvá¯@ét†ÅEÙ^±Q!þ\‰b_¨ëYŸÁµiT-&n߇ñ¬“B+Õ9kx©î%hRÈz-bash-3.00$ Not sure about the output though. However negotiation causes a core: -bash-3.00$ ./openssl s_client -connect eos.es.cpth.ie:4250 CONNECTED(00000004) depth=0 CN = jusworth-lt4.eu.cp.net verify error:num=20:unable to get local issuer certificate verify return:1 depth=0 CN = jusworth-lt4.eu.cp.net verify error:num=21:unable to verify the first certificate verify return:1 Segmentation Fault (core dumped) -bash-3.00$ pstack core core 'core' of 12587: ./openssl s_client -connect eos.es.cpth.ie:4250 000ed408 sha512_block_data_order (30e538, 30c050, 71a, 30e588, 30c050, 64f98fa7) + 8 0009fb30 ssl3_digest_cached_records (2f8ae0, 6, 2f8ea0, 14, 100, 2f8ea0) + 1cc 000980ec ssl3_get_certificate_request (2f8ae0, 2f8ea0, 2f8ea0, 10, a42e0, 2f8ae0) + 90 00093ad8 ssl3_connect (2f8ae0, 0, 1180, 1000, 1130, ffffffff) + 6c0 000aa2b8 ssl23_get_server_hello (2f8ae0, 16, 3, 3, 2f8ea0, 301638) + 648 000a9198 ssl23_connect (2f8ae0, 0, 3000, 2b4d64, 2b3d78, 1) + 588 000aa60c ssl23_write (2f8ae0, 2f0270, 0, 3000, ff247c94, a8c10) + 4c 0004ee64 s_client_main (0, 0, 1, 2b4d64, 2f8ae0, 2f4280) + 7374 0001328c do_cmd (2eb3c8, 3, ffbffad0, 2b4638, 13e64, 2b3d78) + b8 00012f08 main (4, ffbffacc, 2eb3c8, 29fc00, 2b3d78, 2b49dc) + 3a4 00012a08 _start (0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2b3d78) + 108 Regards, John From: openssl-users [mailto:openssl-users-boun...@openssl.org] On Behalf Of John Foley Sent: 15 April 2015 15:10 To: openssl-users@openssl.org<mailto:openssl-users@openssl.org> Subject: Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL 1.0.2 Solaris 32 bit build is broken How about the ./openssl sha1 command? Does that bomb too? It might be interesting to copy crypto/sha/asm/sha1-sparcv9.pl from the 1.0.1 source into the 1.0.2 source. Then clean, configure, compile and try again. There were changes to this file between 1.0.1 and 1.0.2. Perhaps a bug was introduced. I'm assuming this script generates the SHA source for your target platform. On 04/15/2015 09:56 AM, John Unsworth wrote: core 'core' of 24243: ./openssl rand 64 000e9ce8 sha1_block_data_order (2ec298, 2ec2f4, 4, ffbfe018, ffbfe01c, 44) + 8 00226160 ssleay_rand_add (ffbfe114, 1, 20, ffbfdfec, 0, 14) + 530 00227048 RAND_poll (4, ffbfe100, ffbfe120, ffbfe120, 2c0650, 2c0644) + 38c 00226c00 ssleay_rand_status (c734, 0, 2b9f7c, 2c05cc, 2a0e70, 13000) + 138 00065eb4 app_RAND_load_file (ffbfe418, 2d5238, 0, 2800, 0, 1) + 88 00077cb8 rand_main (0, 0, ff242b30, 0, 0, 0) + 4b8 0001328c do_cmd (2eb4e8, 2, ffbffae0, 2b4728, 13e64, 2b3e98) + b8 00012f08 main (3, ffbffadc, 2eb4e8, 2a0000, 2b3e98, 2b4afc) + 3a4 00012a08 _start (0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2b3e98) + 108 Regards, John. From: openssl-users [mailto:openssl-users-boun...@openssl.org] On Behalf Of John Foley Sent: 15 April 2015 13:31 To: openssl-users@openssl.org<mailto:openssl-users@openssl.org> Subject: Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL 1.0.2 Solaris 32 bit build is broken Do you see the same stack trace when simply using the random number generator: ./openssl rand 64 What if you simply use SHA1: ./openssl sha1 <somefile> On 04/14/2015 12:17 PM, John Unsworth wrote: 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<mailto: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<mailto: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 _______________________________________________ openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users _______________________________________________ openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
_______________________________________________ openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
