Jivin Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu lays it down ...
> On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 13:41:16 +1100, Herbert Xu said:
> 
> > OK this is not pretty but it is actually correct.  Notice how we only
> > overstep the mark for E_KEY but never for D_KEY.  Since D_KEY is only
> > initialised after this, it is OK for us to trash the start of D_KEY.
> 
> I think a big comment block describing this behavior is called for,
> as it carries an implicit requirement that D_KEY and E_KEY remain
> adjacent in memory.  Anybody allocating space between them is in for
> a rude awakening....

Sounds like a bug waiting to happen to me.
Why not do something like the attached patch.

Cheers,
Davidm

-- 
David McCullough, david_mccullough@au.securecomputing.com, Ph:+61 734352815
Secure Computing - SnapGear  http://www.uCdot.org http://www.cyberguard.com