Re: [openssl-dev] [openssl.org #3940] Missing CRL checks in cms/smime cmdline utilities

[Dmitry Belyavsky via RT]

Thank you very much!

19 авг. 2016 г. 6:47 PM пользователь "Rich Salz via RT" 
написал:

> For now we just added a comment to master, 1.0.2, 1.0.1 in the cms.pod and
> smime.pod files:
>
> Note that no revocation check is done for the recipient cert, so if that
> key has been compromised, others may be able to decrypt the text.
>
> --
> Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3940
> Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted
>
>

-- 
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3940
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

Re: [openssl-dev] [openssl.org #3940] Missing CRL checks in cms/smime cmdline utilities

[Dmitry Belyavsky]

Thank you very much!

19 авг. 2016 г. 6:47 PM пользователь "Rich Salz via RT" 
написал:

> For now we just added a comment to master, 1.0.2, 1.0.1 in the cms.pod and
> smime.pod files:
>
> Note that no revocation check is done for the recipient cert, so if that
> key has been compromised, others may be able to decrypt the text.
>
> --
> Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3940
> Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted
>
>
-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

[openssl-dev] [openssl.org #3940] Missing CRL checks in cms/smime cmdline utilities

[Rich Salz via RT]

For now we just added a comment to master, 1.0.2, 1.0.1 in the cms.pod and
smime.pod files:

Note that no revocation check is done for the recipient cert, so if that
key has been compromised, others may be able to decrypt the text.

-- 
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3940
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

[openssl-dev] [openssl.org #4653] [1.0.2] fails to compile on VC-WIN32

[Richard Levitte via RT]

Please try out this github pull request:
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/1470

Cheers,
Richard

On Fri Aug 19 14:40:02 2016, levitte wrote:
> We totally missed out on adapting util/mk1mf.pl. Fix on its way.
>
> On Fri Aug 19 14:20:20 2016, simon.rich...@hogyros.de wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > the 1.0.2 branch fails to compile for me:
> >
> > link /nologo /subsystem:console /opt:ref /debug
> > /out:out32dll\dtlstest.exe @C:\Windows\TEMP\nm8D73.tmp
> > Creating library tmp32dll\junk.lib and object tmp32dll\junk.exp
> > dtlstest.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol
> > _create_ssl_ctx_pair referenced in function _test_dtls_unprocessed
> > dtlstest.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol
> > _create_ssl_objects referenced in function _test_dtls_unprocessed
> > dtlstest.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol
> > _create_ssl_connection referenced in function _test_dtls_unprocessed
> > dtlstest.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol
> > _bio_f_tls_dump_filter referenced in function _test_dtls_unprocessed
> > dtlstest.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol
> > _mempacket_test_inject referenced in function _test_dtls_unprocessed
> > out32dll\dtlstest.exe : fatal error LNK1120: 5 unresolved externals
> >
> > Changes in this build:
> >
> > http://ci.kicad-pcb.org/job/windows-openssl-
> > msvc/build=release,cpu=x86,label=windows/458/changes'
> >
> > Full build log:
> >
> > http://ci.kicad-pcb.org/job/windows-openssl-
> > msvc/build=release,cpu=x86,label=windows/458/consoleFull
> >
> > Simon
>
>
> --
> Richard Levitte
> levi...@openssl.org


--
Richard Levitte
levi...@openssl.org

-- 
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4653
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

[openssl-dev] [openssl.org #4377] Prevent potential NULL pointer dereference in OpenSSL-1.0.2g (CWE-476)

[Rich Salz via RT]

Fixed with commit a03f81f, will be part of next 1.0.2 release. Thanks!

-- 
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4377
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

[openssl-dev] [openssl.org #4380] [PATCH] Missing Sanity Checks for EVP_PKEY_new() in OpenSSL-1.0.2g

[Rich Salz via RT]

Fixed with commit a03f81f, will be part of next 1.0.2 release. Thanks!

-- 
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4380
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

[openssl-dev] [openssl.org #4382] [PATCH] Missing Sanity Check(s) for BUF_strdup() in OpenSSL-1.0.2g

[Rich Salz via RT]

Fixed with commit a03f81f, will be part of next 1.0.2 release. Thanks!

-- 
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4382
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

[openssl-dev] [openssl.org #4375] [PATCH] Missing Sanity Checks for OPENSSL_malloc() in OpenSSL-1.0.2g

[Rich Salz via RT]

Fixed with commit a03f81f, will be part of next 1.0.2 release. Thanks!

-- 
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4375
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

[openssl-dev] [openssl.org #4385] [PATCH] Missing Sanity Checks for RSA_new_method() in OpenSSL-1.0.2g

[Rich Salz via RT]

Fixed with commit a03f81f, will be part of next 1.0.2 release. Thanks!

-- 
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4385
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

[openssl-dev] [openssl.org #4374] [PATCH] Potential for NULL pointer dereferences in OpenSSL-1.0.2g (CWE-476)

[Rich Salz via RT]

Fixed with commit a03f81f, will be part of next 1.0.2 release. Thanks!

-- 
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4374
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

[openssl-dev] [openssl.org #4371] [PATCH] Missing Sanity Check for malloc() in openssl-1.0.2g for 'apps/speed.c'

[Rich Salz via RT]

Fixed with commit a03f81f, will be part of next 1.0.2 release. Thanks!

-- 
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4371
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

[openssl-dev] [openssl.org #4370] [PATCH] Potential for NULL pointer dereferences in OpenSSL-1.0.2g (CWE-476)

[Rich Salz via RT]

Fixed with commit a03f81f, will be part of next 1.0.2 release. Thanks!

-- 
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4370
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

[openssl-dev] [openssl.org #4384] [PATCH] Missing Sanity Check plus potential NULL pointer deref (CWE-476)

[Rich Salz via RT]

Fixed with commit a03f81f, will be part of next 1.0.2 release. Thanks!

-- 
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4384
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

[openssl-dev] [openssl.org #4386] [PATCH] Add sanity checks for BN_new() in OpenSSL-1.0.2g

[Rich Salz via RT]

Fixed with commit a03f81f, will be part of next 1.0.2 release. Thanks!

-- 
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4386
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

[openssl-dev] [openssl.org #4653] [1.0.2] fails to compile on VC-WIN32

[Richard Levitte via RT]

We totally missed out on adapting util/mk1mf.pl. Fix on its way.

On Fri Aug 19 14:20:20 2016, simon.rich...@hogyros.de wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the 1.0.2 branch fails to compile for me:
>
> link /nologo /subsystem:console /opt:ref /debug
> /out:out32dll\dtlstest.exe @C:\Windows\TEMP\nm8D73.tmp
> Creating library tmp32dll\junk.lib and object tmp32dll\junk.exp
> dtlstest.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol
> _create_ssl_ctx_pair referenced in function _test_dtls_unprocessed
> dtlstest.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol
> _create_ssl_objects referenced in function _test_dtls_unprocessed
> dtlstest.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol
> _create_ssl_connection referenced in function _test_dtls_unprocessed
> dtlstest.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol
> _bio_f_tls_dump_filter referenced in function _test_dtls_unprocessed
> dtlstest.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol
> _mempacket_test_inject referenced in function _test_dtls_unprocessed
> out32dll\dtlstest.exe : fatal error LNK1120: 5 unresolved externals
>
> Changes in this build:
>
> http://ci.kicad-pcb.org/job/windows-openssl-
> msvc/build=release,cpu=x86,label=windows/458/changes'
>
> Full build log:
>
> http://ci.kicad-pcb.org/job/windows-openssl-
> msvc/build=release,cpu=x86,label=windows/458/consoleFull
>
> Simon


--
Richard Levitte
levi...@openssl.org

-- 
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4653
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

[openssl-dev] [openssl.org #4653] [1.0.2] fails to compile on VC-WIN32

[Simon Richter via RT]

Hi,

the 1.0.2 branch fails to compile for me:

link /nologo /subsystem:console /opt:ref /debug
/out:out32dll\dtlstest.exe @C:\Windows\TEMP\nm8D73.tmp
   Creating library tmp32dll\junk.lib and object tmp32dll\junk.exp
dtlstest.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol
_create_ssl_ctx_pair referenced in function _test_dtls_unprocessed
dtlstest.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol
_create_ssl_objects referenced in function _test_dtls_unprocessed
dtlstest.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol
_create_ssl_connection referenced in function _test_dtls_unprocessed
dtlstest.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol
_bio_f_tls_dump_filter referenced in function _test_dtls_unprocessed
dtlstest.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol
_mempacket_test_inject referenced in function _test_dtls_unprocessed
out32dll\dtlstest.exe : fatal error LNK1120: 5 unresolved externals

Changes in this build:

http://ci.kicad-pcb.org/job/windows-openssl-msvc/build=release,cpu=x86,label=windows/458/changes'

Full build log:

http://ci.kicad-pcb.org/job/windows-openssl-msvc/build=release,cpu=x86,label=windows/458/consoleFull

   Simon


-- 
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4653
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

[openssl-dev] [openssl.org #4652] [consultation] SSL_get_error returns SSL_ERROR_SSL if read() returns -1 / EAGAIN

[Rich Salz via RT]

Same situation, please use a current/modern release; 1.0.1 is only getting
security fixes.

-- 
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4652
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

Re: [openssl-dev] Partially- vs. full- reduced inputs to ecp_nistz256_neg

[Andy Polyakov]

>> It appears to me that with multiplication, squaring, subtraction,
>> negation, halving *preserving* property of being fully reduced (i.e. if
>> inputs are fully reduced, then output is too), we only have to watch out
>> for mul_by_[23], i.e. ensure that their outputs are fully reduced. This
>> would ensure that output will always be fully reduced.
> 
> Let me state thing in a different way, and see if this is what you
> meant: Every function will have as a prerequisite that its inputs are
> fully reduced and will have a postcondition that its output is fully
> reduced.

Assertion is that every function but addition and mul_by_[23] *has* (not
"will have", but "has") such postcondition that their outputs are fully
reduced as long as inputs are. Not to mention that multiplication (and
squaring) *can* (or should we say "is likely to") produce fully reduced
output even if inputs are not fully reduced.

> We know that ecp_nistz256_add doesn't fully reduce its output
> even if the input is fully reduced, and we know that
> ecp_nistz256_mul_by_[23] are implemented in terms of ecp_nistz256_add
> (or equivalent logic, in the case of some of the ASM stuff).
> Accordingly, the plan of action is:
> 
> * Fix ecp_nistz256_mul_by_2 and ecp_nistz256_mul_by_3 to fully reduce
> their outputs.
> 
> * Fix ecp_nistz256_add to fully reduce its output.

As for specifically addition see below. As for fixing mul_by_[23] and
the fact that they use addition. There are two ways. a) Modify addition
so that it *preserves* property of being fully reduced and leave
mul_by_[23] as is. b) Let addition as is and add additional step to
mul_by_[23]. The choice of approach can be platform-specific. For
example on x86_64 a) is simpler and appears more efficient. But on some
platforms b) could be better option.

> * Ensure in ecp_nistz256_points_mul that all the input coordinates are
> fully reduced.

I didn't mean to add any additional steps, but simply see that inputs
should be fully reduced. Simply put question is if output from
conversion to Montgomery representation is fully reduced. And then as
all involved subroutines would *preserve* the property, everything
remains fully reduced throughout the complete course.

> After all of this, we won't have to worry about the handling of
> partially-reduced values anywhere.
> 
> Is that correct? In particular, you said "we only have to watch out
> for mul_by_[23]" but you didn't mention ecp_nistz256_add, which *is*
> used directly in ecp_nistz256_point_double, according to the reference
> C implementation.

Rationale behind not explicitly mentioning addition is following
sequence from ecp_nistz256_point_double:

ecp_nistz256_add(M, in_x, Zsqr);
ecp_nistz256_mul_mont(M, M, Zsqr);
ecp_nistz256_mul_by_3(M, M);
ecp_nistz256_sqr_mont(res_x, M);

It doesn't matter if addition returns partially reduced result, as long
as mul_by_3 ties it up.

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev