summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/c3/c6fb24e6fc9460fa8577c0b7ac53895609ec79
blob: 54dbf75415c4ad1189519976460b14b9927c2c27 (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <thomasv1@gmx.de>) id 1WPDIb-0006vF-Js
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sun, 16 Mar 2014 15:48:29 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmx.de
	designates 212.227.17.22 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=212.227.17.22; envelope-from=thomasv1@gmx.de;
	helo=mout.gmx.net; 
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.22])
	by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1WPDIa-0001g6-9n
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sun, 16 Mar 2014 15:48:29 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.27] ([84.101.32.222]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103)
	with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MWCKz-1WeKNz08kr-00XHTf for
	<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Sun, 16 Mar 2014 16:48:22 +0100
Message-ID: <5325C7C5.3070802@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 16:48:21 +0100
From: Thomas Voegtlin <thomasv1@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
References: <5325A61B.6050802@gmx.de>	<CAAS2fgR766pjD43bZawuJH9VQ7S0dQRGY9HetOuj9HR3Pk=1_A@mail.gmail.com>	<5325B5BC.3030501@gmx.de>
	<CAAS2fgQfrnBt3oVNOX4OPJ-3dM+77WMkFDhU-NFBUGEwWSFz-w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgQfrnBt3oVNOX4OPJ-3dM+77WMkFDhU-NFBUGEwWSFz-w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:L/RyXaG7MCYFXaUNAf2USPrlnfm4TWsGc6KhPINO2PArkSW0kE0
	idLVjNZJvtbaj2QGj08mwQJ22/Xkqvnj4ESIrsNAF8YlMtlEmKuHOhqxODwt0PAH594me9z
	wfu4B9iWKnErB+PphTEI0V0WIcuQvx3mbxgAntBX6zXrm49V4JPesOjGOAV5lr/uBcnqzxc
	2h0rozf4u+g2Ug7v6jvVA==
X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
	sender-domain
	0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
	(thomasv1[at]gmx.de)
	-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
	no trust [212.227.17.22 listed in list.dnswl.org]
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	0.2 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends in
	digit (thomasv1[at]gmx.de)
X-Headers-End: 1WPDIa-0001g6-9n
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Electrum 1.9.8 release
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 15:48:29 -0000

Thanks again for having a look.

Given these problems, I have decided to remove
the encryption methods from the current release.
I retagged 1.9.8 and updated the packages.

Thomas



Le 16/03/2014 15:39, Gregory Maxwell a écrit :
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 7:31 AM, Thomas Voegtlin <thomasv1@gmx.de> wrote:
>> thanks for your feedback!
>>
>> I was not aware that that implementation was flawed.
>> I will see how I can fix that code and get back to you.
> It also leaks on the order of 7 bits of data about the message per
> message chunk.  I'm also think it's likely that there are some
> messages which are just incorrectly decrypted.   ... it's really
> screwy and suspect.