<feed xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom'>
<title>openbsd/src/lib/libssl, branch OPENBSD_5_7_BASE</title>
<subtitle>A mirror of https://github.com/libressl/openbsd.git
</subtitle>
<id>https://git.lua4.win/openbsd/atom?h=OPENBSD_5_7_BASE</id>
<link rel='self' href='https://git.lua4.win/openbsd/atom?h=OPENBSD_5_7_BASE'/>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.lua4.win/openbsd/'/>
<updated>2015-03-08T16:48:48+00:00</updated>
<entry>
<title>This commit was manufactured by cvs2git to create tag 'OPENBSD_5_7_BASE'.</title>
<updated>2015-03-08T16:48:48+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>cvs2svn</name>
<email>admin@example.com</email>
</author>
<published>2015-03-08T16:48:48+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.lua4.win/openbsd/commit/?id=da1a9ad3a4a867ba6569c05e6fca66d7f296c553'/>
<id>urn:sha1:da1a9ad3a4a867ba6569c05e6fca66d7f296c553</id>
<content type='text'>
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Reject DH keys sent by a server if they are considered too small; inspired</title>
<updated>2015-03-08T16:48:47+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>miod</name>
<email></email>
</author>
<published>2015-03-08T16:48:47+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.lua4.win/openbsd/commit/?id=973703db67a8e73d70e63afa8f2cde19da09144d'/>
<id>urn:sha1:973703db67a8e73d70e63afa8f2cde19da09144d</id>
<content type='text'>
by a similar BoringSSL change, but raising the limit to 1024 bits.
ok jsing@ markus@ guenther@ deraadt@
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Fix a minor information leak that was introduced in t1_lib.c r1.71, whereby</title>
<updated>2015-03-02T13:43:09+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>jsing</name>
<email></email>
</author>
<published>2015-03-02T13:43:09+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.lua4.win/openbsd/commit/?id=45ee9e335c1b859ecec006aefb1a3c604a1c8d29'/>
<id>urn:sha1:45ee9e335c1b859ecec006aefb1a3c604a1c8d29</id>
<content type='text'>
an additional 28 bytes of .rodata (or .data) is provided to the network. In
most cases this is a non-issue since the memory content is already public.

Issue found and reported by Felix Groebert of the Google Security Team.

ok bcook@ beck@
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Fix CVE-2014-3570: properly calculate the square of a BIGNUM value.</title>
<updated>2015-02-25T15:39:49+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>bcook</name>
<email></email>
</author>
<published>2015-02-25T15:39:49+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.lua4.win/openbsd/commit/?id=f3031aa7bff24911a8cae9bdd7cdcd88d8554f42'/>
<id>urn:sha1:f3031aa7bff24911a8cae9bdd7cdcd88d8554f42</id>
<content type='text'>
See https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv_20150108.txt for a more detailed
discussion.

Original OpenSSL patch here:
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/a7a44ba55cb4f884c6bc9ceac90072dea38e66d0

The regression test is modified a little for KNF.
ok miod@
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Fix CVE-2015-0205: Do not accept client authentication with Diffie-Hellman</title>
<updated>2015-02-25T03:49:21+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>bcook</name>
<email></email>
</author>
<published>2015-02-25T03:49:21+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.lua4.win/openbsd/commit/?id=07a99d742112a2ad5f56da7d83e8519f21d605b9'/>
<id>urn:sha1:07a99d742112a2ad5f56da7d83e8519f21d605b9</id>
<content type='text'>
certificates without requiring a CertificateVerify message.

From OpenSSL commit:
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/1421e0c584ae9120ca1b88098f13d6d2e90b83a3

Thanks to Karthikeyan Bhargavan for reporting this.
ok miod@
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>fourth batch of perlpod(1) to mdoc(7) conversion</title>
<updated>2015-02-23T17:43:24+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>schwarze</name>
<email></email>
</author>
<published>2015-02-23T17:43:24+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.lua4.win/openbsd/commit/?id=3fed19a0557c5cc4db5053d380747aa1615cb201'/>
<id>urn:sha1:3fed19a0557c5cc4db5053d380747aa1615cb201</id>
<content type='text'>
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Bump libcrypto and libssl majors, due to various recent churn.</title>
<updated>2015-02-22T16:03:06+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>jsing</name>
<email></email>
</author>
<published>2015-02-22T16:03:06+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.lua4.win/openbsd/commit/?id=bb820e160520888599d0966ac5d4a5270c855a23'/>
<id>urn:sha1:bb820e160520888599d0966ac5d4a5270c855a23</id>
<content type='text'>
Discussed with/requested by deraadt@ at the conclusion of s2k15.
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Reluctantly add server-side support for TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV.</title>
<updated>2015-02-22T15:54:27+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>jsing</name>
<email></email>
</author>
<published>2015-02-22T15:54:27+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.lua4.win/openbsd/commit/?id=1b087adcf5d3e3b653d1d37eb198d47d73c1e448'/>
<id>urn:sha1:1b087adcf5d3e3b653d1d37eb198d47d73c1e448</id>
<content type='text'>
This allows for clients that willingly choose to perform a downgrade and
attempt to establish a second connection at a lower protocol after the
previous attempt unexpectedly failed, to be notified and have the second
connection aborted, if the server does in fact support a higher protocol.

TLS has perfectly good version negotiation and client-side fallback is
dangerous. Despite this, in order to maintain maximum compatability with
broken web servers, most mainstream browsers implement this. Furthermore,
TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV only works if both the client and server support it and
there is effectively no way to tell if this is the case, unless you control
both ends.

Unfortunately, various auditors and vulnerability scanners (including
certain online assessment websites) consider the presence of a not yet
standardised feature to be important for security, even if the clients do
not perform client-side downgrade or the server only supports current TLS
protocols.

Diff is loosely based on OpenSSL with some inspiration from BoringSSL.

Discussed with beck@ and miod@.

ok bcook@
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>There is not much point constructing an SSL_CIPHER, then calling</title>
<updated>2015-02-22T15:29:39+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>jsing</name>
<email></email>
</author>
<published>2015-02-22T15:29:39+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.lua4.win/openbsd/commit/?id=d7c53bb46a416bee2031d78461f2c83666e6c2ff'/>
<id>urn:sha1:d7c53bb46a416bee2031d78461f2c83666e6c2ff</id>
<content type='text'>
ssl3_cipher_get_value() to get the cipher suite value that we just
put in the struct - use the cipher suite value directly.
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Remove IMPLEMENT_STACK_OF noops.</title>
<updated>2015-02-22T15:19:56+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>jsing</name>
<email></email>
</author>
<published>2015-02-22T15:19:56+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.lua4.win/openbsd/commit/?id=3fa12a5d03a942018ff0c53594eedf9f2f1adb1c'/>
<id>urn:sha1:3fa12a5d03a942018ff0c53594eedf9f2f1adb1c</id>
<content type='text'>
</content>
</entry>
</feed>
