Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by Fnord666 on Sunday January 21 2018, @03:08AM   Printer-friendly
from the communication++ dept.

OpenSSL has made some policy changes regarding use of e-mail lists, cryptographic policies, patch releases, and github use.

The OpenSSL OMC met last month for a two-day face-to-face meeting in London, and like previous F2F meetings, most of the team was present and we addressed a great many issues. This blog posts talks about some of them, and most of the others will get their own blog posts, or notices, later. Red Hat graciously hosted us for the two days, and both Red Hat and Cryptsoft covered the costs of their employees who attended.

One of the overall threads of the meeting was about increasing the transparency of the project. By default, everything should be done in public. We decided to try some major changes to email and such.

Source: https://www.openssl.org/blog/blog/2018/01/18/f2f-london/


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by tibman on Sunday January 21 2018, @03:57PM (1 child)

    by tibman (134) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 21 2018, @03:57PM (#625675)

    They do have a bunch of tests but i have no idea how much code coverage they account for. https://github.com/openssl/openssl/tree/master/test [github.com]
    They can at least ensure that major functionality isn't broken.

    --
    SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by coolgopher on Sunday January 21 2018, @09:10PM

    by coolgopher (1157) on Sunday January 21 2018, @09:10PM (#625804)

    They can at least ensure that major functionality isn't broken.

    Well, isn't *obviously* broken. Testing against timing attacks is hard, and that's exactly the type of vulnerability I'd consider likely to creep in during a refactoring cleanup pass.