On Tue, Nov 25, 2003, Michael Bell wrote:
>
> another problem is the output like you mentioned. -nameopt oneline works
> but -nameopt rfc2253 fails. rfc2253 escapes a blank but perhaps I send
> the blank to OpenSSL by myself - so no real problem. This is not wrong
> but it is senseless.
>
Se
Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
There's possibly a problem in that it would change the meaning of the '+'
character which might break existing use of -subj or even permit some
malicious use. So I'd suggest that any new behaviour should only be enabled
with a command line swicth.
Ok, taken. I created a p
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003, Michael Bell wrote:
>
> -subj in ca.c is important for me. So I start reading the code. I dug in
> req.c and it looks for me like mval signals as the last argument to
> X509_NAME_add_entry_by_NID that this is not a new RDN only an addition
> to the last RDN. Does this be
Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003, Michael Bell wrote:
some people ask me how to create the following subject for certificates:
cn=abc + serialNumber=123,o=company,c=de
It is no problem to insert this subject to the -subj option of "openssl
ca" but the sourcecode looks like OpenSSL
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003, Michael Bell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> some people ask me how to create the following subject for certificates:
>
> cn=abc + serialNumber=123,o=company,c=de
>
> It is no problem to insert this subject to the -subj option of "openssl
> ca" but the sourcecode looks like OpenSSL ca u
Hi,
some people ask me how to create the following subject for certificates:
cn=abc + serialNumber=123,o=company,c=de
It is no problem to insert this subject to the -subj option of "openssl
ca" but the sourcecode looks like OpenSSL ca uses "abc +
serialNumber=123" as value. Is this correct and
