ChipTuner on Nostr: Please do! I want to have support for many languages in the future The issues is that ...
Please do! I want to have support for many languages in the future
The issues is that on my most *nix platforms the `memset(ptr, size);` call gets optimized away because there is no read after write. So it's considered insecure. Along with that both the cl.exe and cc compilers treat volatile argument pointers differently and they even disagree heavily about when to use volatile pointers either as arguments or even in the procedure body. Really the only right way is to look at the assembly after you compile your project to see if there are instructions to wipe the buffer correctly.
Published at
2024-11-05 14:32:16Event JSON
{
"id": "c1d185cf34934fd8c9cad2e4ca8a09f32c472e4a17ba3072d0bf2602206bb392",
"pubkey": "036533caa872376946d4e4fdea4c1a0441eda38ca2d9d9417bb36006cbaabf58",
"created_at": 1730817136,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"ec686020a570bbc5a23f40c4c0672a55da7ee07cfd04f30dcf9ec36d05afd089",
"wss://relay.primal.net/",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"805b1c9227565eebd0c0afa047fbe3624623fc49f284f75c6bca8bbe0fef75ef",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"e3fc673fc5f99cc554d0ff47756795647d25cb6e6658f912d114ae6429d35d35",
"",
"mention"
]
],
"content": "Please do! I want to have support for many languages in the future \n\nThe issues is that on my most *nix platforms the `memset(ptr, size);` call gets optimized away because there is no read after write. So it's considered insecure. Along with that both the cl.exe and cc compilers treat volatile argument pointers differently and they even disagree heavily about when to use volatile pointers either as arguments or even in the procedure body. Really the only right way is to look at the assembly after you compile your project to see if there are instructions to wipe the buffer correctly. ",
"sig": "15e50c72b99acef3eaea502a1ec78e0cdd4a3dc860ed1e9cf64fde8a154f0c93b9e18349a5309d22c14a322cd9d8f2a1d6af552d06ddaaf856b64dff5fe788dc"
}
