In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 21 Jun 2004 08:49:26 +0200 (METDST), "Tim Rice
via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> The FIPS stuff needs a little tune up.
rt>
rt> Makefile.org
rt> - if ! egrep 'define OPENSSL_FIPS' ..; then \
rt> + if egrep 'define OPENSSL_FIPS' ...; then \
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 21 Jun 2004 08:49:26 +0200 (METDST), "Tim Rice
via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> The FIPS stuff needs a little tune up.
rt>
rt> Makefile.org
rt> - if ! egrep 'define OPENSSL_FIPS' ..; then \
rt> + if egrep 'define OPENSSL_FIPS' ...; then \
r
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 16 Jun 2004 19:27:27 -0400, Geoff Thorpe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
geoff> On June 16, 2004 12:46 pm, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
geoff> > kstef> I think we can make do with a less involved fix, actually, by
geoff> &g
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 16 Jun 2004 12:30:28 -0400, Kevin Stefanik
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
kstef> I think we can make do with a less involved fix, actually, by
kstef> just backing out the conditional if the engine still _requires_
kstef> its own copy of the libcrypto code, or, pr
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 14 Jun 2004 19:35:08 -0400, Geoff Thorpe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
geoff> On June 14, 2004 12:00 pm, Kevin Stefanik wrote:
geoff> > I just realized that we may not have been discussing the same
geoff> > issue. When I was referring to dynamically or statical
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 15 Jun 2004 12:49:26 +0200 (METDST), "Stefan
Farfeleder via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt>
rt> On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 10:05:32AM +0200, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker via RT
wrote:
rt> >
rt> > In message <[
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 15 Jun 2004 12:49:26 +0200 (METDST), "Stefan
Farfeleder via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt>
rt> On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 10:05:32AM +0200, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker via RT
wrote:
rt> >
rt> > In message <[
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 15 Jun 2004 08:56:12 +0200 (METDST), "Stefan
Farfeleder via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> the functions get_cryptodev_ciphers() and get_cryptodev_digests() should
rt> set the pointer *cnids to NULL rather than the first member of the array
rt> nids.
Wh
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 15 Jun 2004 08:56:12 +0200 (METDST), "Stefan
Farfeleder via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> the functions get_cryptodev_ciphers() and get_cryptodev_digests() should
rt> set the pointer *cnids to NULL rather than the first member of the array
rt> nids.
Why
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 11 Jun 2004 14:58:00 +0200 (METDST), "[EMAIL
PROTECTED] via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt>
rt> On June 11, 2004 03:00 am, Jack Lloyd via RT wrote:
rt> > Summary: Threaded applications using the AEP engine break badly
rt> > on Linux.
rt>
rt> I see. The
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 11 Jun 2004 14:58:00 +0200 (METDST), "[EMAIL
PROTECTED] via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt>
rt> On June 11, 2004 03:00 am, Jack Lloyd via RT wrote:
rt> > Summary: Threaded applications using the AEP engine break badly
rt> > on Linux.
rt>
rt> I see. The p
Wish granted. *KICK*
-
Please consider sponsoring my work on free software.
See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details.
--
Richard Levitte \ Tunnlandsvägen 52 \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \ S-168 36 BROMMA \ T: +46-708-26 53 44
\ SWEDEN
If you could please send the new patch as an update to this ticket
(for example by replying to this message and making sure it reaches
[EMAIL PROTECTED]), that would be the best way.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 7 Jun 2004 21:33:49 +0200 (METDST), "Green,
Paul via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTE
If you could please send the new patch as an update to this ticket
(for example by replying to this message and making sure it reaches
[EMAIL PROTECTED]), that would be the best way.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 7 Jun 2004 21:33:49 +0200 (METDST), "Green,
Paul via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 1 Jun 2004 09:44:24 -0400, Geoff Thorpe <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
geoff> Yo,
"Yo, yo, listen up..." (I think Eminem said that in 8 Mile)
geoff> This is the install tree that would be created, but the
geoff> installation would then try to place engine libs
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 1 Jun 2004 05:18:59 +0200 (CEST), "Geoff
Thorpe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
geoff> Log:
geoff> This fixes the installation target for dynamic engines,
geoff> which was trying to install to a different location than it
geoff> had created. (BTW,
Fundraising for OpenSSL development
Richard Levitte
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Revision $Id: OpenSSL-funding.html,v 1.4 2004/05/24 11:09:14 levitte
Exp $
Hello OpenSSL users and developper
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 18 May 2004 09:13:30 +0200 (METDST), "Valente,
Luis via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> The EVP_PKEY_bits() function doesn't always return the correct
rt> size for an RSA public key. Consider the following CA certificate
rt> (Verisign's RSA Secure Server
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 17 May 2004 08:58:45 +0200, Andy Polyakov
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
appro> > appro> >>I don't think everything has to be size_t-fied. In some situations it
appro> > appro> >
appro> > appro> >
appro> > appro> > Do you care about 16bit platforms?
appro> > ap
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 17 May 2004 02:37:10 +0200, Andy Polyakov
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
appro> >>I don't think everything has to be size_t-fied. In some situations it
appro> >
appro> >
appro> > Do you care about 16bit platforms?
appro>
appro> Well, I was wondering this quest
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 17 May 2004 00:44:53 +0200, Andy Polyakov
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
appro> > appro> > appro> Log:
appro> > appro> > appro> size_t-fication of message digest APIs. We should
size_t-fy more
appro> > appro> > appro> APIs...
appro> >
appro> > Well, I
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sun, 16 May 2004 20:17:07 +0200, "Dr. Stephen
Henson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
steve> On Sun, May 16, 2004, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
steve>
steve> > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sun, 16 May 2004 19:12:22
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sun, 16 May 2004 19:12:22 +0200, Andy Polyakov
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
appro> > appro> Log:
appro> > appro> size_t-fication of message digest APIs. We should size_t-fy more
appro> > appro> APIs...
appro> >
appro> > Oh, I completely agree, and I have
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sat, 15 May 2004 20:26:15 +0200 (CEST), "Geoff
Thorpe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
geoff> Log:
geoff> This file implements various functions that have since been
geoff> redefined as macros. I'm removing this from the
geoff> NO_DEPRECATED build.
Thank
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sat, 15 May 2004 13:29:56 +0200 (CEST), "Andy
Polyakov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
appro> Log:
appro> size_t-fication of message digest APIs. We should size_t-fy more
appro> APIs...
Oh, I completely agree, and I have a working directory with that going
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 14 May 2004 08:43:33 -0400, "Marquess, Steve Mr
JMLFDC" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Steve.Marquess> Note libssl is considered by FIPS 140 to be
Steve.Marquess> "outside the cryptographic module boundary";
Yeah, my mentioning libssl is a mistake, or as my dea
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 14 May 2004 07:29:51 -0400, "Marquess, Steve Mr
JMLFDC" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Steve.Marquess> Richard Levitte wrote:
Steve.Marquess>
Steve.Marquess> >jaltman> One concern with your answer is that it
Steve.Marquess> >jaltman> appears to imply that FIPS c
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 13 May 2004 17:42:51 -0400, Jeffrey Altman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
jaltman> One concern with your answer is that it appears to imply that
jaltman> FIPS certification can only be useful to applications which
jaltman> statically link in all libraries. There
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 12 May 2004 08:48:52 -0400, "Marquess, Steve Mr
JMLFDC" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Steve.Marquess> We are very close (a few days at most) from the point
Steve.Marquess> where the 26 special source files in the ./fips/ tree
Steve.Marquess> can no longer be mod
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 12 May 2004 06:25:43 -0600, The Doctor <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
doctor> Why does no FIPS still include FIPS??
It doesn't, all it does is throw the FIPS files through the compiler.
However, the FIPS source should be wrapped with #ifdef OPENSSL_FIPS
.. #endi
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 6 May 2004 08:24:57 -0400, "Erik Tkal" <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
etssl> Can anyone answer this? How do I tell if this is a known
etssl> problem with OpenSSL or if the RFC is incorrect, or if this is
etssl> just a accepted deviation?
I can't really say, as t
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 21 Apr 2004 10:37:45 -0400, Geoff Thorpe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
geoff> On April 21, 2004 04:49 am, Richard Levitte via RT wrote:
geoff> > I'm a little hesitant to do this, however, as it has a strong
geoff> > smell of quick and dirty hack (which is about
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 23 Mar 2004 18:12:08 -0500, "Green, Paul"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Paul.Green> I have ported OpenSSL 0.9.7c to the Stratus VOS operating
Paul.Green> system. Thanks for providing such a high-quality porting
Paul.Green> base; it made my job much easier. I a
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 01 Apr 2004 14:38:06 -0500, Rodney <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
rodney> Here are the "diff -u" output for the files "Configure",
rodney> "config" and "Makefile.org" below. Sorry I missed the
rodney> "Makefile.org" in the last submission.
OK. I gotta ask, is t
OK, Fiel, what's up with this? The last post in ticket 862 shows that
you acknowledged the bug has been fixed, and now you send in the
*exact* same bug report again?
I'm killing this ticket, as I assume it was a mistake...
-
Please consider sponsoring my work on free software.
See http://ww
OK, Fiel, what's up with this? The last post in ticket 862 shows that
you acknowledged the bug has been fixed, and now you send in the
*exact* same bug report again?
I'm killing this ticket, as I assume it was a mistake...
-
Please consider sponsoring my work on free software.
See http://www
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:51:13 +0200 (CEST), Richard
Levitte - VMS Whacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
levitte> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:23:29 +0200 (METDST),
"Simon Josefsson via RT" <[EMAIL PROTE
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:51:13 +0200 (CEST), Richard
Levitte - VMS Whacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
levitte> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:23:29 +0200 (METDST),
"Simon Josefsson via RT" <[EMAIL PROTE
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:23:29 +0200 (METDST), "Simon
Josefsson via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt>
rt> "Richard Levitte via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
rt>
rt> > I'm honestly very unsure about this one. After all, "openssl ca"
rt> > already covers this, so
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:23:29 +0200 (METDST), "Simon
Josefsson via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt>
rt> "Richard Levitte via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
rt>
rt> > I'm honestly very unsure about this one. After all, "openssl ca"
rt> > already covers this, so
RT and attachments, I tell ya... This mail is generated externally,
so it does contain the intended attachment...
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 09:44:21 +0200 (METDST), "Richard
Levitte via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt>
rt> I'm guessing that the definition of FAR is mi
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 12:57:48 +1000, "Steven Reddie"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
smr> Sorry for the delay. The snapshot from after you asked me to test it the
smr> first time (openssl-0.9.7-stable-SNAP-20040327) passed my tests.
Thanks.
-
Please consider sponsor
I find the OID "long name" and "short name" thingy a little bit
confusing. The "short name" is not too hard to understand, but it
seems like the "long name" has multiple purposes. In some cases (like
CN vs. commonName), there really are a short and a long name, but in
other cases. In other cases
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 25 Mar 2004 22:22:16 +0100, "Gisle Vanem"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
giva> The d2i_X509_CINF() is prototyped through some hairy
giva> ifdef's by DECLARE_ASN1_FUNCTIONS(X509_CINF)
giva>
giva> The implementation in x_cinfo.c is however missing a 'const':
giva>
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 25 Mar 2004 11:09:42 -0500, Geoff Thorpe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
geoff> On March 25, 2004 10:44 am, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
geoff> > To begin with, I think the correct interpretation is that the output
geoff> > buf
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 25 Mar 2004 10:35:38 -0500, Geoff Thorpe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
geoff> The only thing that would genuinely change the landscape of
geoff> this issue IMHO would be to rerig the RSA API to allow input
geoff> lengths to be specified independantly of the modu
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 24 Mar 2004 10:40:14 -0500, Geoff Thorpe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
geoff> Well I was meaning counter-intuitive at the nit-picking level
geoff> more than anything warranting CVS action. To my mind, they
geoff> *both* RSA_NO_PADDING and RSA_ALREADY_PADDED mean
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 23 Mar 2004 10:48:00 -0800, Jose
Castejon-Amenedo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Jose.Castejon-Amenedo> OK. I would like to add to what you
Jose.Castejon-Amenedo> (correctly) wrote earlier on: a 1,024-bit RSA
Jose.Castejon-Amenedo> key works on 1,024 bits of inp
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 22 Mar 2004 14:33:59 +0100 (MET), "[EMAIL
PROTECTED] via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> Libeay32 linked fine. I got the problems when linking ssleay32. It
rt> complained about 2 unresolved symbols. I ended up copying the
rt> "asn1_lib.obj" line from t
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 22 Mar 2004 14:33:59 +0100 (MET), "[EMAIL
PROTECTED] via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> Libeay32 linked fine. I got the problems when linking ssleay32. It
rt> complained about 2 unresolved symbols. I ended up copying the
rt> "asn1_lib.obj" line from th
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 19 Mar 2004 10:37:41 +1100, "Steven Reddie"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
smr> I'm getting a crash in apps/ocsp.c in the new 0.9.7d kit. Line
smr> 876 now calls free_index(rdb) where it used to use TXT_DB_free.
smr> If rdb is NULL (as can happen with ocsp when
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 15 Mar 2004 13:14:40 +0100 (MET), "Stephen
Henson via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> I'd be interested to know how people are managing to create duplicate
rt> serial numbers: that is what commands and or scripts are being used to
rt> do this.
Easy: upgr
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 15 Mar 2004 13:14:40 +0100 (MET), "Stephen
Henson via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> I'd be interested to know how people are managing to create duplicate
rt> serial numbers: that is what commands and or scripts are being used to
rt> do this.
Easy: upgra
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 15 Mar 2004 03:03:54 -0800 (PST), "S.Mehdi
Sheikhalishahi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
sm_justice> Hi Group
sm_justice> I want to use i2a_ASN1_OBJECT function of openssl But
sm_justice> when I want to compile my program it say
sm_justice>
sm_justice> /home/a
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:42:51 +0100 (CET), Richard
Levitte - VMS Whacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
levitte> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:32:26 +0100 (MET),
"Stephen Henson via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:42:51 +0100 (CET), Richard
Levitte - VMS Whacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
levitte> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:32:26 +0100 (MET),
"Stephen Henson via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:32:26 +0100 (MET), "Stephen
Henson via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> If windows.h is not included first then the #undef X509_NAME has no
rt> effect but the structure still gets defined. When windows.h is included
rt> X509_NAME gets #defin
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:32:26 +0100 (MET), "Stephen
Henson via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> If windows.h is not included first then the #undef X509_NAME has no
rt> effect but the structure still gets defined. When windows.h is included
rt> X509_NAME gets #define
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:22:13 +0100 (MET), "Stephen
Henson via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> > So basically, you're saying that the following would be the right
rt> > thing to do:
rt> >
rt> > evp_md = EVP_get_digestbynid(rkey->type);
rt> >
rt>
rt> Yes it wo
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:22:13 +0100 (MET), "Stephen
Henson via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> > So basically, you're saying that the following would be the right
rt> > thing to do:
rt> >
rt> > evp_md = EVP_get_digestbynid(rkey->type);
rt> >
rt>
rt> Yes it wou
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 27 Feb 2004 14:09:07 +0100 (MET), "Stephen
Henson via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> The workaround we use is to #undef these first in the relevant header
rt> file but as the OP reports this only works if you #include
rt> (which includes wincrypt.h) fir
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 27 Feb 2004 14:09:07 +0100 (MET), "Stephen
Henson via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> The workaround we use is to #undef these first in the relevant header
rt> file but as the OP reports this only works if you #include
rt> (which includes wincrypt.h) firs
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 27 Feb 2004 14:00:24 +0100 (MET), "Stephen
Henson via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt>
rt> [levitte - Fri Feb 27 00:04:45 2004]:
rt>
rt> > I noticed the EVP_dss1() hack, and am pondering about something a bit
rt> > mkore generic. Could you test if the
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 27 Feb 2004 14:00:24 +0100 (MET), "Stephen
Henson via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt>
rt> [levitte - Fri Feb 27 00:04:45 2004]:
rt>
rt> > I noticed the EVP_dss1() hack, and am pondering about something a bit
rt> > mkore generic. Could you test if the f
Questions like these are typical user questions, and should really be
posted on openssl-users rather than openssl-dev.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:41:35 +0800, $AUE(B $Agy(B
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
todayhill> I use openssl 0.9.7c.In BASE64 fuction,128bit in but 17
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 23 Feb 2004 16:26:38 -0800, Lev Walkin <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
vlm> Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
vlm> > On Mon, Feb 23, 2004, Chris Brook wrote:
vlm> >
vlm> >
vlm> >>Is there any support in crypto->x509(v3) for certificate policy
vlm> >>processing/checking
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:40:42 -0500, "Chris Brook"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
cbrook> Is there any support in crypto->x509(v3) for certificate
cbrook> policy processing/checking as described in X.509 or PKIX?
No, not yet. I've plans to do that, but haven't gotten to
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 19 Feb 2004 08:35:59 +0100 (MET), "Bob Fishman
via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt>
rt> Greetings,
rt>
rt> System and version:
rt>
rt> OpenSSL 0.9.7c
rt>
rt>
rt>
rt> Type:
rt> Building, Configuration Error
rt>
rt>
rt> Description:
rt> When doing a
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 19 Feb 2004 08:35:59 +0100 (MET), "Bob Fishman
via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt>
rt> Greetings,
rt>
rt> System and version:
rt>
rt> OpenSSL 0.9.7c
rt>
rt>
rt>
rt> Type:
rt> Building, Configuration Error
rt>
rt>
rt> Description:
rt> When doing a m
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 18 Feb 2004 10:40:26 +0100 (MET), "Dave Roberts
via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> It also copes if they have the same Serial Number as well.
The only way to cope with that situation is to return an error. The
serial number must be unique for each cert
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 18 Feb 2004 10:40:26 +0100 (MET), "Dave Roberts
via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> It also copes if they have the same Serial Number as well.
The only way to cope with that situation is to return an error. The
serial number must be unique for each certi
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sun, 8 Feb 2004 18:31:16 +0100 (MET), "[EMAIL
PROTECTED] via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> fixed it by adding "#include " to crypto/des/des_locl.h
rt> and adding a link "../../e_os.h" in include/openssl/
It's better if you add a '#include "../e_os.h"'
---
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 12 Feb 2004 17:52:18 +0100, "Frederic Donnat"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
frederic.donnat> Je constate que vous avez pu resoudre le probleme! ;)
frederic.donnat> J'espere que notre "engine" a pu vous aider.
frederic.donnat> Belle analyse de votre part dans tou
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sun, 8 Feb 2004 18:31:16 +0100 (MET), "[EMAIL
PROTECTED] via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> fixed it by adding "#include " to crypto/des/des_locl.h
rt> and adding a link "../../e_os.h" in include/openssl/
It's better if you add a '#include "../e_os.h"'
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 6 Feb 2004 10:32:45 + (GMT), Dave Roberts
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
dave.roberts> I've come across an issue with extensions. I have a
dave.roberts> S/MIME signed message, where the signing cert has
dave.roberts> signing + encrypting Key Usage flags, and
Uhmmm, that's definitely not enough. Did you try to compile?
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 27 Jan 2004 22:47:36 +0100 (CET), "Andy
Polyakov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
appro> OpenSSL CVS Repository
appro> http://cvs.openssl.org/
appro> _
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 26 Jan 2004 22:17:45 +0100, "ph-bgt" <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
philippe.bougeret> When I try to compile
philippe.bougeret> openssl-0.9.7-stable-SNAP-20040126, S_IFBLK
philippe.bougeret> (randfile.c) is not defined under windows.
Thanks, I just fixed it (I h
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 26 Jan 2004 12:07:56 +0100, Andy Polyakov
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
appro> > and other details I'm not aware of. I've heard
appro> > suggestions of creating several variants of the OpenSSL libraries that
appro> > would be used in parallell with the differen
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:02:06 -0500, Jeffrey Altman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
jaltman> I think there are two very different markets. One is the
jaltman> cygwin (unix on windows) environments which expect things to
jaltman> be named the way they are on Unix/Linux. T
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 21 Jan 2004 14:40:07 +0100, Andy Polyakov
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
appro> > You're not forgetting to apply this to HEAD, I hope...
appro>
appro> Well, gcc detection and hpux64-parisc2-gcc line were in HEAD since
appro> November. Then as I mentioned in 772
You're not forgetting to apply this to HEAD, I hope...
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:58:20 +0100 (CET), "Andy
Polyakov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
appro> OpenSSL CVS Repository
appro> http://cvs.openssl.org/
appro>
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 20 Jan 2004 21:19:03 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
kjfw> I posted over a month ago about an "Unexpected Signal: 11" in
kjfw> MD5_Init. The same error has happened again, but this time I
kjfw> have a bit more information: MD5_Init was called with a null
kj
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:35:52 +0200, Adi Stav <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
AdiS> In versions engine-0.9.6l and engine-0.9.6k it is no longer possible to
AdiS> connect using the EXP1024-DES-CBC-SHA cipher suite:
The following patch (or a recent snapshot of the 0.9.6 bra
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sun, 4 Jan 2004 18:53:21 +0100 (CET), "Lutz
Jaenicke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
jaenicke> OpenSSL CVS Repository
jaenicke> http://cvs.openssl.org/
jaenicke>
jaenicke>
jaenicke>
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 31 Dec 2003 20:47:36 -0700, Doug Royer <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
Doug>
Doug> I built 0.9.7c with:
Doug>
Doug> ./Configure solaris-sparcv9-cc
Doug>
Doug> And in the Makefile is:
Doug>
Doug>
Doug> ...
Doug> cp openssl.pc $(INSTALL_PREFIX)$(INSTAL
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 30 Dec 2003 07:34:27 -0700, The Doctor <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
doctor> This error is still occuring.
You can stop now, I know about the problem. I have some connection
problems, so it will take a couple more days before I can fix it.
--
Richard Levitte
OK, I'll restore it to what it was previously, tomorrow.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sun, 28 Dec 2003 06:59:44 -0700, The Doctor <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
doctor> inttypes.h seems to be the culprit
doctor>
doctor> Here is a script of the transaction
doctor>
doctor>
doctor> Script starte
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sat, 27 Dec 2003 17:13:18 +0100 (CET), "Richard
Levitte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
levitte> OpenSSL CVS Repository
levitte> http://cvs.openssl.org/
levitte>
levitte>
levitte> Se
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sat, 27 Dec 2003 04:54:29 +0100 (CET), Richard
Levitte - VMS Whacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
levitte> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sat, 27 Dec 2003 02:33:36 +0100, Frédéric
Giudicelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
levitte>
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sat, 27 Dec 2003 02:33:36 +0100, Frédéric Giudicelli
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
groups> So I have to reimplement the code found in crypto\threads\th-lock.c?
groups> Is there a problem with those codes?
groups> Why aren't they compiled in the library by default?
T
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sat, 27 Dec 2003 01:23:25 +0100, Frédéric Giudicelli
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
groups> I cant' find where "CRYPTO_thread_setup" and
groups> "CRYPTO_thread_cleanup" are declared.
You need to use CRYPTO_set_locking_callback(),
CRYPTO_set_dynlock_create_callback(),
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 22 Dec 2003 16:36:30 -0500, Rich Salz <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
rsalz> > RFC1421 says:
rsalz> > ...
rsalz> >Two encapsulation boundaries (EB's) are defined for delimiting
rsalz> >encapsulated PEM messages and for distinguishing encapsulated PEM
rsalz
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 19 Dec 2003 10:49:49 -0600, "Stephen Sprunk"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
stephen> Thus spake "mohanlal jangir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
stephen> >I was looking into the AES CBC code available at
stephen> > http://openbsd.secsup.org/src/lib/libssl/src/crypto/aes
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 18 Dec 2003 17:50:20 +0100, "Dr. Stephen
Henson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
steve> On Thu, Dec 18, 2003, Michael Bell wrote:
steve>
steve> > Hi all,
steve> >
steve> > there is a draft for a technical corrigendum of X.509.
steve> >
steve> > http://www.pki-p
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 17 Dec 2003 12:33:14 -0500, Rich Salz <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
rsalz> Thanks, folks, for explaining. If RT2 is still being
rsalz> maintained, they should add a note to the mail saying
rsalz> "attachments not sent and not lost" :)
Actually, we could do tha
[ this message has [EMAIL PROTECTED] removed as recipient, as it really
doesn't need to get into the database :-) ]
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 17 Dec 2003 11:47:37 -0500, Rich Salz <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
rsalz> The mail stripped the attachments. Are they in RT? If not,
rsalz> ho
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 12 Dec 2003 10:20:47 +0100 (MET), "OpenMacNews
via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> the following changes seem to cure the problem ...
rt>
rt> (EDITOR) Makefile.org
rt> @ 304
rt> --- -compatibility_version ${SHLIB_MAJOR}.`echo ${SHLIB_MINOR}
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 12 Dec 2003 10:20:47 +0100 (MET), "OpenMacNews
via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> the following changes seem to cure the problem ...
rt>
rt> (EDITOR) Makefile.org
rt> @ 304
rt> --- -compatibility_version ${SHLIB_MAJOR}.`echo ${SHLIB_MINOR}
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 11 Dec 2003 18:21:22 +0100 (CET), Richard
Levitte - VMS Whacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
levitte> I'll produce patches shortly, but first I've got to figure out some
levitte> funnies with the fractional part. The followi
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 11 Dec 2003 17:53:51 +0100 (CET), Richard
Levitte - VMS Whacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
levitte> I get ooo.1 with BIO_printf() and 1000.1 with printf(). It's clear to
levitte> me that this is in fact a bug in OpenSSL (especiall
201 - 300 of 2021 matches
Mail list logo
