Re: [openssl-project] To use or not use the iconv API, and to use or not use other libraries

2018-06-11 Thread Bernd Edlinger
On 06/11/18 17:40, Richard Levitte wrote: > In message <8ee45344-9bfc-44f9-9db2-c384f7645...@akamai.com> on Mon, 11 Jun > 2018 15:25:23 +, "Salz, Rich" said: > > rsalz> >*must* do when getting '-pass8bit' is to do a naïve UTF-8 encode > of > rsalz> the input pass phrase string.

Re: [openssl-project] to fully overlap or not to

2018-03-09 Thread Bernd Edlinger
On 03/08/18 12:06, Andy Polyakov wrote: > >> Andy pointed out that my last e-mail was probably not clear enough. >> >> I want to drop the current partially overlapping checks >> on the WRAP mode ciphers (which were ineffective anyways). >> >> And allow the following additional use case for any

Re: [openssl-project] to fully overlap or not to

2018-03-06 Thread Bernd Edlinger
ion of allowed in-place partially overlapping effectively be driven by the implementation requirements. Bernd. On 03/03/18 13:25, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > On 03/01/18 10:59, Andy Polyakov wrote: >>>>> I'd like to request more opinions on >>>>> https://github.com/op

Re: [openssl-project] FW: [openssl/openssl] VMS: lower the entropy demand for this platform specifically (#5904)

2018-04-08 Thread Bernd Edlinger
On 04/08/18 09:49, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:15:32AM +0200, Richard Levitte wrote: >> In message <20180407185034.ga25...@roeckx.be> on Sat, 7 Apr 2018 20:50:35 >> +0200, Kurt Roeckx said: >> >> kurt> > In going from 1.1.0 to 1.1.1, breaking platforms that

Re: [openssl-project] The problem of (implicit) relinking and changed behaviour

2018-04-15 Thread Bernd Edlinger
On 04/15/18 07:53, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > > >> On Apr 15, 2018, at 1:38 AM, Richard Levitte wrote: >> >> Errr, are we? Please inform me, because I cannot remember having seen >> tests that specifically targets the case of programs built with 1.1.0 >> that get implicitly

Re: [openssl-project] Anything else to go in before I call the freeze?

2018-03-19 Thread Bernd Edlinger
OK, I freezed the repository for you. On 03/19/18 19:25, Matt Caswell wrote: > Please can someone freeze the repo for me: > > $ ssh openssl-...@git.openssl.org freeze openssl matt > > I will still take #5677 "Fix no-sm3 (and no-sm2)" after the freeze. Also > if anyone can come up with a fix for

Re: [openssl-project] OpenSSL 1.1.1 Blog

2018-09-12 Thread Bernd Edlinger
Hi, I just read this in the blog article: New OMC Member and New Committers https://www.openssl.org/blog/blog/2018/08/22/updates/ "The latest additions to the committers (in alphabetical order) are: Paul Yang Nicola Tuveri " aehm, maybe we should fix the alphabetical order ? :-)

Re: [openssl-project] inline functions

2019-01-27 Thread Bernd Edlinger
./config -fkeep-inline-functions && make -> build fails with unresolved externals in test/rsa_complex and test/shlibloadtest On 1/27/19 2:23 PM, Dr Paul Dale wrote: > Yes, those are the problematic cases. I think that making the symbols weak > is “good enough” for the moment. Longer term, we

Re: Repo Frozen

2019-09-11 Thread Bernd Edlinger
will we release today? On 9/9/19 5:31 PM, Matt Caswell wrote: > Richard has just frozen the repo in advance of the releases tomorrow. > > There are still some PRs outstanding that we are expecting to be included and > I > will push as they become available: > > >

Re: Repo Frozen

2019-09-09 Thread Bernd Edlinger
On 9/9/19 5:31 PM, Matt Caswell wrote: > Richard has just frozen the repo in advance of the releases tomorrow. > > There are still some PRs outstanding that we are expecting to be included and > I > will push as they become available: > > > https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/9777 > Fix a

Re: Should the return result of CRYPTO_UP_REF() / CRYPTO_DOWN_REF() be checked?

2020-02-10 Thread Bernd Edlinger
On 2/10/20 6:29 PM, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 04:19:20PM +, Matt Caswell wrote: >> >> >> On 10/02/2020 00:15, SHANE LONTIS wrote: >>> With the new architecture changes there are quite a few new calls to >>> >>> CRYPTO_UP_REF() >>> CRYPTO_DOWN_REF() >>> >>> These methods

Re: 1.1.1f

2020-03-26 Thread Bernd Edlinger
On 3/26/20 3:14 PM, Matt Caswell wrote: > The EOF issue (https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/11378) has > resulted in us reverting the original EOF change in the 1.1.1 branch > (https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/11400). > > Given that this seems to have broken quite a bit of stuff, I

Re: 1.1.1f

2020-03-26 Thread Bernd Edlinger
reason for this? Bernd. > Tim. > > On Fri, 27 Mar 2020, 5:41 am Bernd Edlinger, > wrote: > >> So I disagree, it is a bug when it is not constant time. >> >> >> On 3/26/20 8:26 PM, Tim Hudson wrote: >>> +1 for a release - and soon - and without bundling a

Re: 1.1.1f

2020-03-26 Thread Bernd Edlinger
So I disagree, it is a bug when it is not constant time. On 3/26/20 8:26 PM, Tim Hudson wrote: > +1 for a release - and soon - and without bundling any more changes. The > circumstances justify getting this fix out. But I also think we need to > keep improvements that aren't bug fixes out of

Re: 1.1.1f

2020-03-29 Thread Bernd Edlinger
the correct prefix with spaces, as they are in Windows. Can that one at least considered for inclusion? Thanks Bernd. On 3/26/20 9:13 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > > > On 3/26/20 9:10 PM, Tim Hudson wrote: >> We don't guarantee constant time. >> > > #11411 does,

Please have a look at this PR

2020-03-31 Thread Bernd Edlinger
As discussed in the meeting today, I'd like to have my PR Remove x86/x86_64 BSAES and AES_ASM support #9677 be approved soon, as it is holding up other work I plan to do. Thanks Bernd.

Re: 1.1.1f

2020-03-26 Thread Bernd Edlinger
On 3/26/20 3:14 PM, Matt Caswell wrote: > The EOF issue (https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/11378) has > resulted in us reverting the original EOF change in the 1.1.1 branch > (https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/11400). > > Given that this seems to have broken quite a bit of stuff,