<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div class="">Bonjour,</div>
<div apple-content-edited="true" class="">
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">Le 12 févr. 2016 à 01:11, Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL <<a href="mailto:uri@ll.mit.edu" class="">uri@ll.mit.edu</a>> a écrit :</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">Again, you are right, but what's the lesser evil - being unable to use the new OpenSSL because it refuses to deal with the cert that some dim-witten TPM maker screwed up, or accept a certificate with a (minor) violation of DER (but not of BER)?
What bad in your opinion could happen if OpenSSL allowed parsing an integer with a leading zero byte (when it shouldn't be there by DER)?<br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>As shown yesterday, this INTEGER encoding isn’t even valid BER.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Being liberal in what you accept, when dealing with crypto, gives you stuff like this: <a href="https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2014-73/" class="">https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2014-73/</a></div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>
<div class="">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div class="">Cordialement,</div>
<div class="">Erwann Abalea</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>