On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 09:35 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 09:28 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > > I'm way behind the times.
> > > > http://www.faqs.org/rfc/rfc3749.txt
> > > 
> > > Looking at OpenSSL code, I think the patch below will give 0.9.8 ability
> > > to support deflate compression. I'm not sure if I should include that to
> > > Dovecot though. At least not for v1.1. :)
> > > 
> > > diff -r 68a0be847980 src/login-common/ssl-proxy-openssl.c
> > > --- a/src/login-common/ssl-proxy-openssl.c      Fri Jun 20 12:20:17 2008 
> > > +0300
> > > +++ b/src/login-common/ssl-proxy-openssl.c      Sat Jun 21 04:29:51 2008 
> > > +0300
> > > @@ -719,6 +719,7 @@
> > >                                  ssl_clean_free);
> > >         SSL_library_init();
> > >         SSL_load_error_strings();
> > > +       (void)SSL_COMP_get_compression_methods();
> > >  
> > >         extdata_index = SSL_get_ex_new_index(0, dovecot, NULL, NULL, 
> > > NULL);
> > 
> > Huh? As far as I can tell that will just return NULL and have no side
> > effects because you haven't previously added compression methods
> > with SSL_COMP_add_compression_method.
> 
> However, digging deeper,

and yet more, Thunderbird doesn't seem to support
it: http://mxr.mozilla.org/seamonkey/source/security/nss/lib/ssl/ssl3con.c

Neither does evolution, I think, since it too uses libnss.

johannes

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to