LibreSSL with Bob Beck
Jason Tubnor6 HN recommenders · recommended in 5 months, 2014-2025
25K views · 12 years ago · talk · evergreen
Bob Beck of OpenBSD describes the first month of LibreSSL, the fork aimed at cleaning up OpenSSL, including oddities found in the code base and why it was cleaned rather than audited cryptographically.
Frequently linked as an entertaining and alarming account of OpenSSL code quality and why the fork happened.
1:05:51LibreSSL: The first 30 days, and what the Future Holds
Andrea Ross
5K views • 12 years ago
53:0236C3 - A systematic evaluation of OpenBSD's mitigations
media.ccc.de
18K views • 6 years ago
48:02BlackHat USA 2011: SSL And The Future Of Authenticity
Christiaan008
95K views • 15 years ago
1:07:22Invited Talk - Guy Steele
ClojureTV
39K views • 9 years ago
1:17:12C++ Seasoning
aghuttun
58K views • 13 years ago
29:01Netanel Rubin: The Perl Jam: Exploiting a 20 Year-old Vulnerability
media.ccc.de
8K views • 11 years ago
1:02:49Hacking with Andrew and Brad: tip.golang.org
The Go Programming Language
99K views • 11 years ago
29:25Rust NYC: Jon Gjengset - Demystifying unsafe code
Rust Programming Language
27K views • 6 years ago
54:01Abseil's Open Source Hashtables: 2 Years In - Matt Kulukundis - CppCon 2019
CppCon
22K views • 7 years ago
25:37CUFP 2013: Julien Verlaguet, Facebook: Analyzing PHP statically
CUFP 2013
5K views • 13 years ago
1:29:49Going Native 2012 Keynote Stroustrup
savage309
33K views • 14 years ago
45:50"The Mess We're In" by Joe Armstrong
Strange Loop Conference
398K views • 12 years ago
46:22DEF CON 19 - Moxie Marlinspike - SSL And The Future Of Authenticity
DEFCONConference
11K views • 13 years ago
58:37NVIDIA — Securing the Future of Safety and Security of Embedded Software (Captioned)
AdaCore
5K views • 6 years ago
43:28Leaping the chasm from proprietary to open: A survivor's guide
Bryan Cantrill
14K views • 11 years ago
59:2328c3: The Science of Insecurity
28c3
42K views • 14 years ago
1:02:52Joanna Rutkowska: Towards (reasonably) trustworthy x86 laptops
media.ccc.de
27K views • 10 years ago
49:43ZFS Native Encryption by Tom Caputi
OpenZFS
14K views • 10 years ago
34:41Microsoft is Getting Rusty: A Review of Successes and Challenges - Mark Russinovich
Rust Nation UK
46K views • 1 year ago
1:07:10Brian Beckman: Don't fear the Monad
jasonofthel33t
415K views • 13 years ago
19 comments from Hacker News
> And Comic Sans for letters sent to friends finishing design school, obviously. ... and libressl. link (and the talk - ▶ this video )
This exemplifies one of the key reasons OpenBSD forked OpenSSL. For those who haven't seen it I'd recommend this presentation from Bob Beck[1], around the 10 minute mark he recounts fixing issues in the memory allocator which had been reported 4 years prior. Seems there's still a similar backlog sitting behind embargoes? [1] ▶ this video
> I've never seen a terrible huge C codebase libssl/openssl (before the rewrite/fixes especially)? Maybe doesn't qualify as huge? See eg: ▶ this video "LibreSSL with Bob Beck" (the first 30 days)
The immediate effect of Heartbleed was the OpenBSD folk [1] and Google [2] forking OpenSSL. There's a talk from Bob Beck of OpenBSD on pruning OpenSSL, it's pretty hilarious [3]. In that case open source was at least able to react appropriately, even if it didn't act preemptively. [1]: link [2]: link [3]: ▶ this video
Bob Beck also covers this in his talk about the first 30 days of libreSSL. The entire talk is amazing, even 7 years later. ▶ this video
I don't think anyone thought OpenSSL was good code even before Heartbleed. Bob Beck pointed that out in his LibreSSL talk ▶ this video
Big-endian Support for AMD64 - the explanation from the person in the crowd is something of a horror story that I think a lot of have witnessed in various forms. ▶ this video
Bob Beck during his LibreSSL talk had a good overview of what was thought of OpenSSL ▶ this video "we are all guilty"
> it was created as a direct response to Heartbleed The reason for the fork was not Heartbleed itself but the crazy memory allocation done behind the scenes. ▶ this video
I meant my comment in the same spirit as a Southerner means "Bless your heart". I do believe Ted Unagnt's comment is included in the ▶ this video LibrSSL first 30 days along with quite a lot of other oddities.
It does a lot of things it really shouldn't be doing. I recommend you watch Bob Beck's talk about LibreSSL[1] (Ted's there too). [1]: ▶ this video
to be blunt: openssl is a festering heap maintained by a bunch of hacks. They let critical security bugs sit in their queue for 4 years while they sat on them [1]. They also actively worked to disable automated testing with malloc tooling; while obviously that won't catch all bugs, every bit helps. Finally, it contained rafts of code that, bluntly, my boss would probably fire me for checking in. [1] ▶ this video
in the sense that it is utterly wrong, I suppose so... in reality, openssl appears to be a $1mm+/year for-profit fips consulting business [1] that appears to not care much about security, letting serious security issues sit in their bug tracker for years on end [1] ▶ this video
> Maybe I'm naieve, but I think perhaps the problems with OpenSSL had come to light a little bit sooner if all dangerous code had clearly been marked 'unsafe'. After listening to Bob Beck's talk[1], I think people did know how unsafe that code was but no one wanted to take a shot at fixing it until it all went bad. At 2:12 into the video (the Jon Snow slide), he explains why nobody looked (or admitted they looked)[2]. Code can be so bad in any language to discourage people from even attempting to figure out how it works. 1) ▶ this video 2) quotes "Why did WE not look" & "It is your parents talking about how you got made horrible"
From Beck's talk[1] they are not reviewing the cryptography code, merely cleaning up the programming. They admit they don't yet have cryptography experts reviewing if the algorithms/implementations are doing what they are supposed to be doing and that they are in fact secure. [1] ▶ this video
"just fixing the problems in openssl." That's what libressl is about. If you're in any doubt, please see this talk: ▶ this video
I'd much rather have 1 really really good ssl library that everyone uses instead of 2 so-so ones. That's reasonable, but those aren't the options at play here. Not only because GnuTLS is already a thing, but the chances of OpenSSL becoming really really good are questionable. An OpenBSD guy gave a talk a few weeks back where he said that Heartbleed wasn't the reason for the split, it was the reason for digging into the code and realizing that OpenSSL under current leadership isn't capable of being a really really good option. ▶ this video
Just in case someone missed it, here's video of the libressl talk to go with the linked slide(s). ▶ this video
The LibreSSL talk is funny and scary. [watch the other version one ▶ this video so you can hear the other people and see the end]