Re: [openssl-users] X509 Version changes?
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016, Jim Carroll wrote: > I've run into what appears to be a change to defaults between 0.9.8 and > 1.1.0, and I wanted to make sure it's not a bug we've introduced. > > While reviewing unittests, we see that calls to X509_REQ_new() generate an > X509 object with the version set to -1. When we write this object to a PEM > file and read it back, the version is set then set to 0. Is this expected > (GIGO) behavior? > Can you give a few more details about how you are doing this? Steve. -- Dr Stephen N. Henson. OpenSSL project core developer. Commercial tech support now available see: http://www.openssl.org -- openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
Re: [openssl-users] X509 Version changes?
I've run into what appears to be a change to defaults between 0.9.8 and
1.1.0, and I wanted to make sure it's not a bug we've introduced.
While reviewing unittests, we see that calls to X509_REQ_new() generate an
X509 object with the version set to -1. When we write this object to a PEM
file and read it back, the version is set then set to 0. Is this expected
(GIGO) behavior?
begin 666 smime.p7s
M,( &"2J&2(;W#0$'`J" ,( "`0$Q"S )!@4K#@,"&@4`,( &"2J&2(;W#0$'
M`0``H((.$3""!#8P@@,>H ,"`0("`0$P#08)*H9(AO<-`0$%!0`P;S$+, D&
M`U4$!A,"4T4Q%# 2!@-5! H3"T%D9%1R=7-T($%",28P) 8#500+$QU!9&14
