Re: bn_lib.c:bn_expand2()

2003-12-03 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 2 Dec 2003 10:40:16 -0500, Geoff Thorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: geoff> Well I think "plain paranoia" is better placed in locations like the geoff> BN_DEBUG[_RAND] macros followed by the prudent use of self-tests, geoff> valgrind, etc. When I do that "sec

Re: bn_lib.c:bn_expand2()

2003-12-02 Thread Peter Waltenberg
PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/12/2003 01:40 AM Please respond to openssl-dev                 To:        [EMAIL PROTECTED]         cc:        Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]         Subject:        Re: bn_lib.c:bn_expand2() On December

Re: bn_lib.c:bn_expand2()

2003-12-02 Thread Geoff Thorpe
On December 2, 2003 09:35 am, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: > geoff> afterwards by the memcpy(), and likewise the use of > geoff> sizeof(b->d[0]) seems strange given the logic in the previous > geoff> line uses sizeof(BN_ULONG) (which is better). But "unbelievably > geoff> buggy"? How so? >

Re: bn_lib.c:bn_expand2()

2003-12-02 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 2 Dec 2003 08:52:04 -0500, Geoff Thorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: geoff> > If we switch to use the mem* variant in bn_expand_internal(), it needs geoff> > to be corrected. The current form is unbelievingly buggy (I didn't geoff> > even look at it last I pla

Re: bn_lib.c:bn_expand2()

2003-12-02 Thread Geoff Thorpe
On December 2, 2003 05:19 am, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: > geoff> I understand the desire to cater for CPU pipelining with the > geoff> 8-wise loop unrolling, but is this a better solution than just > geoff> using memset() and letting the compiler take care of the same > geoff> sort of th

Re: bn_lib.c:bn_expand2()

2003-12-02 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 1 Dec 2003 17:27:46 -0500, Geoff Thorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: geoff> Hi Andy (and anyone else that's interested), geoff> geoff> As part of the general hackathon/audit we're doing in geoff> crypto/bn/ I once again came across the curious zeroing code in

Re: bn_lib.c:bn_expand2()

2003-12-01 Thread Geoff Thorpe
On December 1, 2003 05:53 pm, Lev Walkin wrote: > Geoff Thorpe wrote: > > As part of the general hackathon/audit we're doing in crypto/bn/ I > > once again came across the curious zeroing code in bn_expand2, only > > this time I figured it was high time for me to actually ask you about > > it. :-)

Re: bn_lib.c:bn_expand2()

2003-12-01 Thread Lev Walkin
Geoff Thorpe wrote: Hi Andy (and anyone else that's interested), As part of the general hackathon/audit we're doing in crypto/bn/ I once again came across the curious zeroing code in bn_expand2, only this time I figured it was high time for me to actually ask you about it. :-) I understand the