Re: [openssl-dev] Blog post; changing in email, crypto policy, etc

> On Jan 24, 2018, at 12:55 PM, Dr. Matthias St. Pierre > wrote: > > As for the two mailing lists openssl-users and openssl-dev: It was always > my understanding that the former was for usability questions starting > from newbie questions up to very sophisticated

Re: [openssl-dev] Blog post; changing in email, crypto policy, etc

On 24.01.2018 19:08, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > > Well, but we now have "openssl-project" for discussions of the > ongoing development of OpenSSL. It is mostly for team members, > but though it is moderated, IIRC others can join and post. Ok, I didn't know that. If anyone seriously participating

Re: [openssl-dev] Blog post; changing in email, crypto policy, etc

> On Jan 24, 2018, at 1:25 PM, Dr. Matthias St. Pierre > wrote: > > Ok, I didn't know that. If anyone seriously participating on GitHub can > join the moderated openssl-project list then this sounds like a good > replacement for openssl-dev, because that list

Re: [openssl-dev] Blog post; changing in email, crypto policy, etc

Viktor Dukhovni wrote: >> On Jan 24, 2018, at 9:27 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: >> >>> email clients are designed to handle hundreds to thousands of messages >>> a day, Github UI isn't > Indeed email is best for informal

Re: [openssl-dev] About multi-thread unsafe for APIs defined in crypto/objects/obj_dat.c

* The current patch ( PR 5164 ) just changes "can be safely used" to "can generally be used safely". Without enough information for a user of the library to know whether a given usage is safe, this isn't useful documentation. When it comes to threading, "generally safe" is the same as

Re: [openssl-dev] About multi-thread unsafe for APIs defined in crypto/objects/obj_dat.c

On 24. jan. 2018, at 6:11 f.h., Benjamin Kaduk via openssl-dev wrote: > On 01/23/2018 07:19 PM, Salz, Rich via openssl-dev wrote: >> Well, the most likely fix is to make the “safely” wording be more vague, >> which I doubt you’ll like. But I doubt anyone on the team

Re: [openssl-dev] About multi-thread unsafe for APIs defined in crypto/objects/obj_dat.c

* Well, the most likely fix is to make the “safely” wording be more vague, which I doubt you’ll like. But I doubt anyone on the team has much interest in fixing 1.0.2 locking issues. https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/5164 -- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe:

Re: [openssl-dev] About multi-thread unsafe for APIs defined in crypto/objects/obj_dat.c

Thanks! But we are providing SDK to our customers to retrieve extension from the certificates downloaded from Internet. We have no idea what OID will be used by the SDK users. Only SDK users will know what OID will be expected in a certificate. OpenSSL should provide API to retrieve extension

Re: [openssl-dev] About multi-thread unsafe for APIs defined in crypto/objects/obj_dat.c

* OpenSSL should provide API to retrieve extension by OID. Yes! Can you open a github issue for that? -- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

Re: [openssl-dev] About multi-thread unsafe for APIs defined in crypto/objects/obj_dat.c

On 01/23/2018 07:19 PM, Salz, Rich via openssl-dev wrote: > > * OpenSSL APIs, which makes the following OpenSSL documentation > statement invalid > (https://www.openssl.org/docs/man1.0.2/crypto/threads.html > >

Re: [openssl-dev] Blog post; changing in email, crypto policy, etc

Hubert Kario wrote: > that marking a conversation as ignored and going to next one is two key > combinations and less than a second, github ones require me to go to > the web UI which is slow, and if I have to view the issue because > subject is ambiguous it

Re: [openssl-dev] About multi-thread unsafe for APIs defined in crypto/objects/obj_dat.c

Create the OID at your program startup and store the NID in a global variable. From: Yun Jiang Reply-To: openssl-dev Date: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 at 7:38 AM To: openssl-dev Subject: Re: [openssl-dev] About

Re: [openssl-dev] Blog post; changing in email, crypto policy, etc

> On Jan 24, 2018, at 9:27 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: > >> email clients are designed to handle hundreds to thousands of messages >> a day, Github UI isn't Indeed email is best for informal ad-hoc back and forth threaded discussion, while Github et. al. are for issue

Re: [openssl-dev] Blog post; changing in email, crypto policy, etc

On 24.01.2018 18:32, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > >> On Jan 24, 2018, at 9:27 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: >> >>> email clients are designed to handle hundreds to thousands of messages >>> a day, Github UI isn't > Indeed email is best for informal ad-hoc back and forth threaded

Re: [openssl-dev] Blog post; changing in email, crypto policy, etc

Viktor Dukhovni wrote: |> On Jan 24, 2018, at 9:27 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: |>> email clients are designed to handle hundreds to thousands of messages |>> a day, Github UI isn't | |Indeed email is best for informal ad-hoc back and forth

Re: [openssl-dev] About multi-thread unsafe for APIs defined in crypto/objects/obj_dat.c

Thanks! Is this issue fixed in 1.1.0? Yun From: openssl-dev [mailto:openssl-dev-boun...@openssl.org] On Behalf Of Salz, Rich via openssl-dev Sent: 24 January 2018 01:19 To: openssl-dev@openssl.org Subject: Re: [openssl-dev] About multi-thread unsafe for APIs defined in crypto/objects/obj_dat.c

Re: [openssl-dev] About multi-thread unsafe for APIs defined in crypto/objects/obj_dat.c

Thanks! The problem is that I need to get a customized certificate extension based on an OID. Until now, I cannot find a solution without dynamically calling OBJ_create(OID, NULL. NULL). Yun From: openssl-dev [mailto:openssl-dev-boun...@openssl.org] On Behalf Of Peter Waltenberg Sent: 24