That's a pretty good analogy. It isn't too obvious from just looking at the diff, but once you
see the context you realize that they effectivly gutted ssleay_rand_bytes() and
ssleay_rand_add(), and apparently the fix only fixes one of those? So it looks like there is
still a problem.
Posted May 13, 2008 21:15 UTC (Tue) by lambda (subscriber, #40735)
[Link]
No, ssleay_rand_bytes is supposed to be returning a random number
generated from the current state of the random number generator. It happened to be mixing in
some entropy from the (uninitialized) output buffer passed in, which is not particularly helpful nor
harmful, other than messing with Valgrind. It's only in the ssleay_rand_add
function that commenting out the line causes any particular problems, because the whole point of
ssleay_rand_add is to seed the random number generator.
You can check the documentation in man RAND_bytes and man
RAND_add for more information on how these are supposed to work.