> [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Tue Mar 13 09:12:05 2007]: > > > I'm totally confused by a difference I'm observing > between openssl-0.9.8 and openssl-0.9.8d, both > compiled on the same solaris box with the same > compiler installation (gcc-3.4.4), both passing > "make test". > > I'm decrypting a DES-encrypted "message", that was > padded with "80 00 00 00 00 00 00 00" (in hex code) > before encryption. > > The essential lines of code are as follows: > > EVP_CIPHER_CTX ctx_des; > > EVP_DecryptInit(&ctx_des, EVP_des_ede_cbc(), key, NULL); > > out = (BYTE*)malloc(inlen + EVP_CIPHER_block_size(EVP_des_ede_cbc())); > > EVP_DecryptUpdate(&ctx_des, out, &ds, in, inlen); > > EVP_DecryptFinal(&ctx_des, out + ds, &ps); >
Can you include a complete program that reproduces this error? > Now, with openssl-0.9.8 everything is fine, > EVP_DecryptFinal returns 1 indicating that the padding was OK. > > With openssl-0.9.8d, I get an error from EVP_DecryptFinal, > (which is indicating a padding error, isn't it?) > Well call ERR_print_errors_fp(stderr) to be sure that is the error. > Any idea of what is going on? Has support for that padding scheme > been discontinued in the "middle" of the 0.9.8 series? Am I missing > something that should be obvious? > Support hasn't been removed for standard block padding and it probably never will be. ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
