News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:BearSSL – Smaller SSL/TLS by stompin on Thursday November 03, 2016 @11:00AM (#12864483)
and moves and copies won't have potential for other memory management bugs? You'll still have memory management overhead and now additional complexity.
Re:BearSSL – Smaller SSL/TLS by moduspwnens14 on Thursday November 03, 2016 @11:12AM (#12864598)
At a high level, isn't this like implementing your own "malloc" and "free" that just pulls from your process's own memory pool instead of the OS? Or is there more to it than that?
Re:BearSSL – Smaller SSL/TLS by clarry on Thursday November 03, 2016 @11:15AM (#12864627)
No, it's just placing the appropriate structs and buffers on the stack (when not provided by the caller).

It does eliminate a certain couple classes of errors, and makes some others less likely.

I didn't read all the code, but I don't think it's using alloca or the like. So the stack allocation sizes are known at compile time, and bounded unless there's some recursion going on (which is unlikely).