Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:72506 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 4605 invoked from network); 12 Feb 2014 09:04:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 12 Feb 2014 09:04:32 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=yohgaki@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=yohgaki@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.49 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: yohgaki@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.215.49 mail-la0-f49.google.com Received: from [209.85.215.49] ([209.85.215.49:54844] helo=mail-la0-f49.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 56/A0-00747-F193BF25 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 04:04:32 -0500 Received: by mail-la0-f49.google.com with SMTP id y1so6668416lam.8 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 01:04:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=i/BRb7GZAsHBacJPNBNeulJ59Fg/e1rRlXbKxCJxCxY=; b=Hc+I81dPNrTES8Car2AfwawxP3KMmJoWSLuaF4bobwFOtUtZaj9cQZ4mPIrA5tSmh/ lml7Md0zLDrVrryWKCmEmfTjDqG6Tx6daoJ8TjgJ9yUPLouMx4zQ66TKu7kQ9C56xyQI jMKL8M9TSylUY+xyz9uMvlrZmk1wbZ+SVDhSAce8LdaV+RCCbTmi3VlEvhokQd4t3jyF qHPyIe0bQbN9BvjaKcqogFymQLAXpkccwU7RhVwsFRSydst3Ae2mFH6Gwz0Ms8m3il1P 2lg8+YC/UAksN+i0hmGjKC0lNQBsD9JwcjGR4Nt3mbImp8Wc++bS+/XN56JiclvVSA5B m3mw== X-Received: by 10.152.20.134 with SMTP id n6mr229112lae.83.1392195868595; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 01:04:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: yohgaki@gmail.com Received: by 10.112.199.37 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 01:03:48 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52F87F03.1080100@pthreads.org> References: <52F87F03.1080100@pthreads.org> Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 18:03:48 +0900 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 4vvhHwME9yqNdEuv5fSh08Jg0y0 Message-ID: To: Joe Watkins Cc: PHP internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01493dbe349b8304f231dce3 Subject: Re: [VOTE] Multbye char handling - Remove vulnerability related tomultibyte short and long term From: yohgaki@ohgaki.net (Yasuo Ohgaki) --089e01493dbe349b8304f231dce3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Joe, On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Joe Watkins wrote: > I voted no, on both. > > The first rfc doesn't even contain a patch, so I have nothing to review, I > don't much care what you think the reasons are for the change, I care what > the code says, and there isn't any. > > The second RFC is based on an extension that was written 5 years ago and > hasn't been touched since. > > Not good enough, nothing like good enough ... > Thank you for the comment. It helps :) It would be nice to have patch, I agree. I don't have luxury to write code that would not be used... I don't mind to have vote for proposed patch and improve, though. Is a patch must have requirement for RFC? I think it worth to agree what we should have, then decide/write code like timing safe string comparison. I wouldn't write number of timing safe functions to compare their performance unless it was decided to include. https://github.com/yohgaki/php-src/compare/PHP-5.6-rfc-hash-compare I hope you change your mind. Regards, -- Yasuo Ohgaki yohgaki@ohgaki.net --089e01493dbe349b8304f231dce3--