On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 06:13:46PM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 06:49:08PM +0400, Solar Designer wrote:
> > Can we maybe define working but IV-ignoring functions for ECB (like I
> > did), but use memory-clearing nocrypt*() for CFB and CTR (as long as
> > these are not supported)? Of course, all of these will return -ENOSYS.
>
> I thought we would not have to protect users from shooting themselves in
> the foot (right now they get an oops). But I agree that the cost of
> protecting them is close to zero so we probably should do it. If Herbert
> is OK, do you care to provide a new patch ?
Yes, if the above proposal is OK with Herbert, I will provide a new
patch for 2.4.
Thanks,
Alexander
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
