[110369] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: More on in-memory zeroisation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Florian Weimer)
Mon Dec 10 14:43:49 2007
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
To: Thierry Moreau <thierry.moreau@connotech.com>
Cc: Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>, cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:50:07 +0100
In-Reply-To: <475CEF1D.4000503@connotech.com> (Thierry Moreau's message of
"Mon, 10 Dec 2007 02:47:41 -0500")
* Thierry Moreau:
> Peter Gutmann wrote:
>
>> There was a discussion on this list a year or two back about problems in using
>> memset() to zeroise in-memory data, specifically the fact that optimising
>> compilers would remove a memset() on (apparently) dead data in the belief that
>> it wasn't serving any purpose.
>>
>
> Then, s/memset(?,0,?)/(memset)(?,0,?)/ to get rid of compiler in-lining.
>
> Ref: ANSI X3.159-1989, section 4.1.6 (Use of C standard library functions)
This isn't true; inlining of standard library functions is always
permitted under the as-if rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
