- Sep 14, 2016
-
-
Richard Levitte authored
This is an amendment to the september 8 commit titled "VMS: Don't force symbol mixed case when building DSOs" Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Richard Levitte authored
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Richard Levitte authored
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Richard Levitte authored
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Richard Levitte authored
RT#4674 issue 2 Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Rich Salz authored
Resolves GH1515 and GH1509. Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
An OCSP_RESPID in a status request extension has 2 bytes for the length not 1. Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
The internal SRP function t_fromb64() converts from base64 to binary. It does not validate that the size of the destination is sufficiently large - that is up to the callers. In some places there was such a check, but not in others. Add an argument to t_fromb64() to provide the size of the destination buffer and validate that we don't write too much data. Also add some sanity checks to the callers where appropriate. With thanks to Shi Lei for reporting this issue. Reviewed-by: Richard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
-
- Sep 13, 2016
-
-
Matt Caswell authored
Don't call WPACKET_sub_memcpy(), WPACKET_sub_allocation_bytes() and WPACKET_start_sub_packet_len() directly. Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
Remove extra indentation at the start of an "if". Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
Updated the construction code to use the new function. Also added some convenience macros for WPACKET_sub_memcpy(). Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Richard Levitte authored
Also, enlarge test group 20 to include openssl commands that aren't tested otherwise Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Richard Levitte authored
RT#4674 Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
FdaSilvaYY authored
Add comments, document -valid option. Add some const qualifiers. Reviewed-by: Andy Polyakov <appro@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org> (Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/1560)
-
Rich Salz authored
Reviewed-by: Andy Polyakov <appro@openssl.org>
-
Andy Grundman authored
This flag got moved after -xarch=v9 in 1.1.0 and had the unexpected side effect of the compiler building for 32-bit v8plusa instead of v9. GH#1521 CLA: none; trivial Signed-off-by: Andy Polyakov <appro@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: Tim Hudson <tjh@openssl.org>
-
Viktor Szakats authored
Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org> (Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/1520)
-
Viktor Szakats authored
it appears when using gcc/mingw: ``` apps/s_client.c:815:9: warning: variable 'at_eof' set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable] int at_eof = 0; ^~~~~~ ``` Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org> (Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/1512)
-
Andy Polyakov authored
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Andy Polyakov authored
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Andy Polyakov authored
Traditionally Configure passed $ENV{PERL} to Makefile. But this resulted in ambiguilty as Configure script could be executed by interpreter different from one executing remaining scripts. Since we separate compile- and run-time interpreters with HASHBANGPERL variable, there is no reason to segment the build procedure. Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
A peer continually sending unrecognised warning alerts could mean that we make no progress on a connection. We should abort rather than continuing if we receive an unrecognised warning alert. Thanks to Shi Lei for reporting this issue. Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
Addressing more feedback comments. Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
Two locations had the same loop for writing out a value. Pull it out into a function. Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
This is an internal API. Some of the tests were for programmer erorr and "should not happen" situations, so a soft assert is reasonable. Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
A few style tweaks here and there. The main change is that curr and packet_len are now offsets into the buffer to account for the fact that the pointers can change if the buffer grows. Also dropped support for the WPACKET_set_packet_len() function. I thought that was going to be needed but so far it hasn't been. It doesn't really work any more due to the offsets change. Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
The PACKET documentation is already in packet_locl.h so it makes sense to have the WPACKET documentation there as well. Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
The tests will only work in no-shared builds because WPACKET is an internal only API that does not get exported by the shared library. Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
Otherwise a mem leak can occur. Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
Also added the WPACKET_cleanup() function to cleanup a WPACKET if we hit an error. Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
No need to declare an explicit sub-packet. Just start one. Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
To avoid confusion with the read PACKET structure. Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
Matt Caswell authored
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
- Sep 12, 2016
-
-
David Woodhouse authored
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: Richard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
-
- Sep 11, 2016
-
-
Richard Levitte authored
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-