search for: gnutls_rnd

...ionally compile based on GNUTLS > support?  Why > don't we have gnutls required? That's exactly what I'm suggesting in my patches [1]. gnutls is widely available (including Linux, Windows, *BSD, Mac Os X). However, before doing that we need to fix virRandomBits() to actually call gnutls_rnd(). 1: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2018-May/msg02077.html Michal

...t?  Why >>> don't we have gnutls required? >> >> That's exactly what I'm suggesting in my patches [1]. gnutls is widely >> available (including Linux, Windows, *BSD, Mac Os X). However, before >> doing that we need to fix virRandomBits() to actually call gnutls_rnd(). >> >> 1: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2018-May/msg02077.html >> > >I have this faint recollection of one of the CI platform builds failing >because something in the gnutls* family didn't exist there when I was >making the changes to add the domain...

...nutls required? >> > > >> > > That's exactly what I'm suggesting in my patches [1]. gnutls is widely >> > > available (including Linux, Windows, *BSD, Mac Os X). However, before >> > > doing that we need to fix virRandomBits() to actually call gnutls_rnd(). >> > > >> > > 1: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2018-May/msg02077.html >> > > >> > >> > I have this faint recollection of one of the CI platform builds failing >> > because something in the gnutls* family didn't exis...

Hi, Recently I want to fuzz samba systematically (instead of functional fuzzing like OSS-Fuzz/samba). However, the fuzzer acts like smbclient and needs to establish a connection with the samba server via NTLM authentication. The NTLMSSP_Challenge sent by the server is not deterministic, which can render the fuzzing based on previously captured traffic futile. Does samba provide a fuzzing mode

...TLS >> support?  Why >> don't we have gnutls required? > > That's exactly what I'm suggesting in my patches [1]. gnutls is widely > available (including Linux, Windows, *BSD, Mac Os X). However, before > doing that we need to fix virRandomBits() to actually call gnutls_rnd(). > > 1: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2018-May/msg02077.html > I have this faint recollection of one of the CI platform builds failing because something in the gnutls* family didn't exist there when I was making the changes to add the domain master secret code.... A...

...#39;t we have gnutls required? > > > > > > That's exactly what I'm suggesting in my patches [1]. gnutls is widely > > > available (including Linux, Windows, *BSD, Mac Os X). However, before > > > doing that we need to fix virRandomBits() to actually call gnutls_rnd(). > > > > > > 1: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2018-May/msg02077.html > > > > > > > I have this faint recollection of one of the CI platform builds failing > > because something in the gnutls* family didn't exist there when I was &g...

...; > > > > > > > > That's exactly what I'm suggesting in my patches [1]. gnutls is widely > > > > > available (including Linux, Windows, *BSD, Mac Os X). However, before > > > > > doing that we need to fix virRandomBits() to actually call gnutls_rnd(). > > > > > > > > > > 1: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2018-May/msg02077.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have this faint recollection of one of the CI platform builds failing > > > > because something i...

On 05/25/2018 09:17 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote: >>> We should probably seed it with data from /dev/urandom, and/or the new >>> Linux getrandom() syscall (or BSD equivalent). > > I'm not quite sure that right after reboot there's going to be enough > entropy. Every service that's starting wants some random bits. But it's > probably better than what we