Re: pgcrypto: PGP signatures
От | Marko Tiikkaja |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgcrypto: PGP signatures |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 541308D2.3000402@joh.to обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgcrypto: PGP signatures (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pgcrypto: PGP signatures
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Jeff, On 9/8/14 7:30 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: > There seems to be a memory leak in pgp_sym_decrypt_verify that does not > exist in pgp_sym_decrypt. It is about 58 bytes per decryption. Thanks. There seemed to have been a small confusion about the ownership of ctx->sig_digest_ctx. I've fixed that now and the test case you provided doesn't appear to be leaking memory anymore. I also added some other missing free calls to pgp_free(). I've attached a patch with this problem fixed, in case you still want to keep testing (all your work so far very much appreciated, btw!) The attached also fixes the ntohl() problem I pointed out in my previous patch, and now AFAIK there aren't any outstanding technical issues. However.. > If i understand the sequence here: The current git HEAD is that > pgp_pub_decrypt would throw an error if given a signed and encrypted > message, and earlier version of your patch changed that to decrypt the > message and ignore the signature, and the current version went back to > throwing an error. > > I think I prefer the middle of those behaviors. The original behavior > seems like a bug to me, and I don't think we need to be backwards > compatible with bugs. Why should a function called "decrypt" care if the > message is also signed? That is not its job. I haven't updated the patch yet because I don't want to waste my time going back and forth until we have a consensus, but I think I prefer Jeff's suggestion here to make the _decrypt() functions ignore signatures. Does anyone else want to voice their opinion? .marko
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: