[openssl.org #373] Fw: is SSL_CTX_new() thread safe (on win32) ?

2002-12-02 Thread Louis Solomon [SteelBytes] via RT
submiting as a bug (read the whole email ...) Louis Solomon www.SteelBytes.com - Original Message - From: Louis Solomon [SteelBytes] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 2:10 PM Subject: Re: is SSL_CTX_new() thread safe (on win32) ? ok,

Re: OpenSSL and compression using ZLIB

2002-12-02 Thread Pablo J Royo
(Note this approach keeps compression code in BIOs without duplicating it in ssl/, so applications can use the BIOs independantly too. Also, new compression methods are easier to add - eg. define a libbzip2-based BIO and add a new compression id+hook in the SSL/TLS code). I agree with this. I´ve

Re: Trying to understand bn_div_words()

2002-12-02 Thread Andy Polyakov
levitte bn_div_words(0xC383,0x838B4B53,0x8000) Hmm, a call like that gave me an aruthmetic error on Linux... According to bc 0xC383838B4B53 / 0x8000 = 0x18707. The result is 33 bits or in other words the operation *overflows*. According to IA-32 manual overflow is

Re: [openssl.org #201] OpenSSL 0.9.6e failing make test

2002-12-02 Thread Alain Guibert via RT
Hello again Lutz, On Friday, November 29, 2002 at 1:20:25 PM +0100, Lutz Jänicke via RT wrote: On Fri, Nov 29, 2002 at 12:59:29PM +0100, Alain Guibert via RT wrote: - with 0.9.6g: installing man3/SSL_write.3 /usr/bin/pod2man: Invalid man page - 1st pod line is not NAME in SSL_write.pod

Re: Trying to understand bn_div_words()

2002-12-02 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Mon, 02 Dec 2002 10:51:30 +0100, Andy Polyakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: appro levitte bn_div_words(0xC383,0x838B4B53,0x8000) appro appro Hmm, a call like that gave me an aruthmetic error on Linux... appro appro According to bc 0xC383838B4B53 /

Re: [openssl.org #201] OpenSSL 0.9.6e failing make test

2002-12-02 Thread Lutz Jaenicke via RT
On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 10:55:26AM +0100, Alain Guibert via RT wrote: There is just an alert at some point: | installing man3/engine.3 | ../../util/pod2man.pl: Unrecognized pod directive in paragraph 34 of engine.pod: head3 | ../../util/pod2man.pl: Unrecognized pod directive in

Re: [openssl.org #201] OpenSSL 0.9.6e failing make test

2002-12-02 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED] via RT
On December 2, 2002 05:53 am, Lutz Jaenicke via RT wrote: On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 10:55:26AM +0100, Alain Guibert via RT wrote: There is just an alert at some point: | installing man3/engine.3 | ../../util/pod2man.pl: Unrecognized pod directive in paragraph 34 | of engine.pod: head3

authorityKeyIdentifier

2002-12-02 Thread Michael Bell
Hi, I read the discussion about the authorityKeyIdentifier and the problems with Microsoft. So I used my contacts, packaged the problem and now it looks for me like Microsoft also interprets the extension in the correct way. The problem is now where do you find the bug or problem? I forward

[Fwd: RE: RFC 3280 and smartcardlogin]

2002-12-02 Thread Michael Bell
This is the second answer and there are no doubts. They use the same interpretation of the standard like OpenSSL. So if you find a situation where Microsoft's software uses another interpretation then you should feel free to contact these guys directly or refer Microsoft's support to them.

[Fwd: RE: RFC 3280 and smartcardlogin]

2002-12-02 Thread Michael Bell
This was the first answer from Microsoft. Perhaps my description was not really perfect. Michael Original Message Subject: RE: RFC 3280 and smartcardlogin Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:55:13 -0800 From: David Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Glenn Pittaway [EMAIL PROTECTED],

Re: [openssl.org #356] Bug in CRLF translation in PKCS7_sign

2002-12-02 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED] via RT
Ah, that is a good point in the case where we saw this, the source bio was a bio_s_mem, i.e. a memory bio, so it was not doing r text-mode eol translation. In other instances we do use the r mode with file bios, and I guess that might explain why we never saw it happen in those functions...

Re: [openssl.org #356] Bug in CRLF translation in PKCS7_sign

2002-12-02 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:30:20 +0100 (MET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: rt Ah, that is a good point in the case where we saw rt this, the source bio was a bio_s_mem, i.e. a memory rt bio, so it was not doing r text-mode eol rt translation. In

Re: [openssl.org #356] Bug in CRLF translation in PKCS7_sign

2002-12-02 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker via RT
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Mon, 2 Dec 2002 22:30:20 +0100 (MET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: rt Ah, that is a good point in the case where we saw rt this, the source bio was a bio_s_mem, i.e. a memory rt bio, so it was not doing r text-mode eol rt translation. In

RE: [PATCH] Windows CE (against openssl-0.9.7-stable-SNAP-20021201)

2002-12-02 Thread Steven Reddie
Sure. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker Sent: Tuesday, 3 December 2002 9:12 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PATCH] Windows CE (against openssl-0.9.7-stable-SNAP-20021201) In message

[openssl.org #371] undeclared MAXHOSTNAMELEN in ssltest.c (097snap)

2002-12-02 Thread Richard Levitte via RT
Defining USE_SOCKETS before e_os.h is included probably helps :-). This ticket is now resolved. [jaenicke - Sun Dec 1 19:02:13 2002]: [[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Sat Nov 30 23:00:17 2002]: Building OpenSSL 0.9.7 beta4 and snap 20021129 on RedHat 8.0 (gcc 3.2 glibc 2.3) configured with

Status of 0.9.6h?

2002-12-02 Thread Verdon Walker
What is the status of the 0.9.6h defect release? Verdon Walker (801) 861-2633 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell, Inc., the leading provider of Net business solutions http://www.novell.com __ OpenSSL Project