Reply to post:

FreeBSD 13.0 to ship without WireGuard support as dev steps in to fix 'grave issues' with initial implementation

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

To be honest the description of the code in the article...

There were random sleeps added to "fix" race conditions, validation functions that just returned true, catastrophic cryptographic vulnerabilities, whole parts of the protocol unimplemented, kernel panics, security bypasses, overflows, random printf statements deep in crypto code, the most spectacular buffer overflows, and the whole litany of awful things that go wrong when people aren't careful when they write C.

... looks like just the kind of outsourced code that I have the pleasure of working with (which means fixing it after it blows up in live). And as in the article it just appears in the source tree one day with a ticket number and if you open the ticket there's nothing that says how or why.

Someone will be along in a moment to blame C for all that, by the way.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021