Thank you. I still am not sure if it the best idea, Because i will be getting for example 1,000,000 a times in a day the same certificate, I don't want to do that even short process if not necessary, what I could do is compare the times between X509_cmp() and my code, or even to doing memcmp() on the original text of the X509.
So I would like to know if any one thinks there is a problem with how i am doing it, or if it will be slower then using some other way to do it? Thanks in advance (And thank you Dr. Stephen Henson) Joe On 1/26/06, Dr. Stephen Henson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2006, Joe Gluck wrote: > > > That is great to know because I did not know if while loading the > > certiicate it parses the fields and hashes or just loads it. > > > > It parses most fields. The public key and extension parts aren't parsed until > a call is explicitly made to parse them. > > > > But any way, if I call the X509_cmp() it will do the > > X509_check_purpose() and I would like to avoid that by just getting > > the public key part and doing memcmp on it with the one already in my > > cache. > > > > X509_check_purpose() with those parameters just checks to see if the hash (and > other things) is valid, if not calculating it and then returns. So after that > first call it is a no op. > > Steve. > -- > Dr Stephen N. Henson. Email, S/MIME and PGP keys: see homepage > OpenSSL project core developer and freelance consultant. > Funding needed! Details on homepage. > Homepage: http://www.drh-consultancy.demon.co.uk > ______________________________________________________________________ > OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org > Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org > Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
