full-disclosure - Re: possible backdoor in OpenSSL X509 verification

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 19:33:16 +0100
From: Ben Laurie <ben@...ks.org>
To: Jeffrey Walton <noloader@...il.com>
Cc: Full Disclosure List <full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk>,
 Arnis <arnis@...ee>
Subject: Re: possible backdoor in OpenSSL X509 verification

On 6 September 2013 19:22, Jeffrey Walton <noloader@...il.com> wrote:

> I've tried to get the Foundation to address these problems with policy
> ("everything must have positive and negative test cases"). No one
> really cared. Then I tried to get them to address it by accepting my
> negative test cases (which broke things in practice). No one really
> cared. Until the project improves their engineering process, things
> won't change.
>

I'm finding git pull requests way easier to deal with than all previous
known mechanisms for contributing. I care a lot about testing, but like the
"one full time developer" I'm also busy - and mostly not with OpenSSL.
Anyway, give it a try.

Content of type "text/html" skipped

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/