Re: explicit_bzero vs. alternatives

2020-08-11 Thread Theo de Raadt
Philipp Klaus Krause wrote: > In the end, I wouldn't be surprised, if WG14 just goes with one of the > existing names, not caring about reserved identifiers. There is only one existing name in common use. Even glibc chose to go with the name explicit_bzero. I notice you keep using the other

Re: explicit_bzero vs. alternatives

2020-08-11 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso
Theo de Raadt wrote in <61139.1597087...@cvs.openbsd.org>: |Philipp Klaus Krause wrote: |> Am 10.08.20 um 17:00 schrieb Theo de Raadt: |>> Philipp Klaus Krause wrote: |>> |>>> OpenBSD has the explicit_bzero function to reliably (i.e. even if not |>>> observable in the C abstract machine)

Re: explicit_bzero vs. alternatives

2020-08-11 Thread Philipp Klaus Krause
>> >> WG14 has reserved some identifiers for future extensions of the >> standard. E.g. those starting with mem_. Naturally, others then choose >> identifiers that do not conflict with this, such as explicit_bzero. But >> if that name is then used in the standard unchanged, it would mean that >>

Re: explicit_bzero vs. alternatives

2020-08-11 Thread Otto Moerbeek
On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 08:20:32AM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote: > On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 08:13:24AM +0200, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote: > > > Am 11.08.20 um 02:52 schrieb Theo de Raadt: > > > > > > But no, WG14 are the lords and masters in the high castle, and now 6 > > > years after the ship

Re: explicit_bzero vs. alternatives

2020-08-11 Thread Otto Moerbeek
On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 08:13:24AM +0200, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote: > Am 11.08.20 um 02:52 schrieb Theo de Raadt: > > > > But no, WG14 are the lords and masters in the high castle, and now 6 > > years after the ship sailed something Must Be Done, it must look like > > They Solved The Problem,

Re: explicit_bzero vs. alternatives

2020-08-11 Thread Philipp Klaus Krause
Am 11.08.20 um 02:52 schrieb Theo de Raadt: > > But no, WG14 are the lords and masters in the high castle, and now 6 > years after the ship sailed something Must Be Done, it must look like > They Solved The Problem, and so they'll create an incompatible API. > > Will they be heroes? No, not

Re: explicit_bzero vs. alternatives

2020-08-10 Thread Theo de Raadt
Steffen Nurpmeso wrote: > Theo de Raadt wrote in > <61139.1597087...@cvs.openbsd.org>: > |Philipp Klaus Krause wrote: > |> Am 10.08.20 um 17:00 schrieb Theo de Raadt: > |>> Philipp Klaus Krause wrote: > |>> > |>>> OpenBSD has the explicit_bzero function to reliably (i.e. even if not >

Re: explicit_bzero vs. alternatives

2020-08-10 Thread Theo de Raadt
Tim van der Molen wrote: > Philipp Klaus Krause (2020-08-10 21:00 +0200): > > Am 10.08.20 um 17:00 schrieb Theo de Raadt: > > > Philipp Klaus Krause wrote: > > > > > >> OpenBSD has the explicit_bzero function to reliably (i.e. even if not > > >> observable in the C abstract machine) overwrite

Re: explicit_bzero vs. alternatives

2020-08-10 Thread Tim van der Molen
Philipp Klaus Krause (2020-08-10 21:00 +0200): > Am 10.08.20 um 17:00 schrieb Theo de Raadt: > > Philipp Klaus Krause wrote: > > > >> OpenBSD has the explicit_bzero function to reliably (i.e. even if not > >> observable in the C abstract machine) overwrite memory with zeroes. > >> > >> WG14 is

Re: explicit_bzero vs. alternatives

2020-08-10 Thread Theo de Raadt
> Our base tree has 641 calls to explicit_bzero, because previous > commitees fucked the C language and created hundreds of not thousands of > security vulnerabilities by leaving data on the stack. In application > software, both explicit_memset and explicit Sorry I didn't finish the last

Re: explicit_bzero vs. alternatives

2020-08-10 Thread Theo de Raadt
Philipp Klaus Krause wrote: > Am 10.08.20 um 17:00 schrieb Theo de Raadt: > > Philipp Klaus Krause wrote: > > > >> OpenBSD has the explicit_bzero function to reliably (i.e. even if not > >> observable in the C abstract machine) overwrite memory with zeroes. > >> > >> WG14 is currently

Re: explicit_bzero vs. alternatives

2020-08-10 Thread Philipp Klaus Krause
Am 10.08.20 um 17:00 schrieb Theo de Raadt: > Philipp Klaus Krause wrote: > >> OpenBSD has the explicit_bzero function to reliably (i.e. even if not >> observable in the C abstract machine) overwrite memory with zeroes. >> >> WG14 is currently considering adding similar functionality to C2X. >

Re: explicit_bzero vs. alternatives

2020-08-10 Thread Theo de Raadt
Philipp Klaus Krause wrote: > OpenBSD has the explicit_bzero function to reliably (i.e. even if not > observable in the C abstract machine) overwrite memory with zeroes. > > WG14 is currently considering adding similar functionality to C2X. Then perhaps in the interests of the public they

explicit_bzero vs. alternatives

2020-08-10 Thread Philipp Klaus Krause
OpenBSD has the explicit_bzero function to reliably (i.e. even if not observable in the C abstract machine) overwrite memory with zeroes. WG14 is currently considering adding similar functionality to C2X. Considered options include: * A function like explicit_bzero or memset_explicit, that