Opened 5 years ago
Last modified 2 years ago
#10812 new defect
CryptReleaseContext missed for windows
| Reported by: | cypherpunks | Owned by: | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | Low | Milestone: | Tor: unspecified |
| Component: | Core Tor/Tor | Version: | |
| Severity: | Normal | Keywords: | tor-client, win32, tor-crypto |
| Cc: | Actual Points: | ||
| Parent ID: | Points: | ||
| Reviewer: | Sponsor: |
Description
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa379886%28v=vs.85%29.aspx
When you have finished using the CSP, release the handle by calling the CryptReleaseContext function.
Child Tickets
Change History (9)
comment:1 Changed 5 years ago by
| Keywords: | tor-client crypto win32 added |
|---|---|
| Milestone: | → Tor: 0.2.5.x-final |
comment:2 Changed 5 years ago by
| Milestone: | Tor: 0.2.5.x-final → Tor: 0.2.??? |
|---|
comment:3 Changed 4 years ago by
| Milestone: | Tor: 0.2.??? → Tor: 0.2.8.x-final |
|---|
comment:4 Changed 4 years ago by
| Milestone: | Tor: 0.2.8.x-final → Tor: 0.2.??? |
|---|
Move a few tickets out of 0.2.8. I would take a good patch for most of these if somebody writes one. (If you do, please make the ticket needs_review and move it back into maint-0.2.8 milestone. :) )
comment:6 Changed 3 years ago by
| Keywords: | tor-03-unspecified-201612 added |
|---|---|
| Milestone: | Tor: 0.3.??? → Tor: unspecified |
Finally admitting that 0.3.??? was a euphemism for Tor: unspecified all along.
comment:7 Changed 2 years ago by
| Keywords: | tor-03-unspecified-201612 removed |
|---|
Remove an old triaging keyword.
comment:8 Changed 2 years ago by
| Keywords: | tor-crypto added; crypto removed |
|---|
Unify "crypto" keyword with "tor-crypto".
comment:9 Changed 2 years ago by
| Priority: | Medium → Low |
|---|---|
| Severity: | → Normal |
Note: See
TracTickets for help on using
tickets.
Well, we cache it in the static "provider" field. So I guess we could remove that field outside of the function and release it in crypto_global_cleanup. The alternative is to make it non-static and re-acquire and re-release it every time we call crypto_strongest_rand().
Is either of these options better than the other?