This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author lemburg
Recipients Lukasa, alex, benjamin.peterson, christian.heimes, dstufft, giampaolo.rodola, janssen, lemburg, pitrou
Date 2015-11-20.11:51:36
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <564F0940.6060800@egenix.com>
In-reply-to <1448017800.19.0.946147791129.issue25672@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
On 20.11.2015 12:10, Cory Benfield wrote:
> Yeah, while generally speaking OpenSSL doesn't ship betas, it does provide them as tarballs. I have a beta of 1.0.2 floating around somewhere on my machine that I was using for ALPN testing back in 2014, and so I can speak from personal experience and say that people do actually work with betas sometimes. On this issue (defending ourselves from a CVE) my instinct is to be conservative. However, we should allow later patch releases of OpenSSL 1.0.0 to have this optimisation if they're safe.

Ah, right. For new major release versions such as 1.0.1 or 1.0.2
they do ship betas, but historically they have often introduced
new features in their abcde... level releases without doing
betas for those first - that's what I was thinking of :-)

> Therefore, I've uploaded a new patch that does allow for 1.0.0m and later to use this optimisation too. It makes the conditional a little more complex, but c'est la vie.

LGTM

Thanks,
-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
eGenix.com
History
Date User Action Args
2015-11-20 11:51:36lemburgsetrecipients: + lemburg, janssen, pitrou, giampaolo.rodola, christian.heimes, benjamin.peterson, alex, dstufft, Lukasa
2015-11-20 11:51:36lemburglinkissue25672 messages
2015-11-20 11:51:36lemburgcreate