Xinwen Fu wrote:
Hi,
In the man page of RSA_public_encrypt, it says
The random number generator must be seeded prior to calling
RSA_public_encrypt()
yes, (pseudo) random numbers are needed for the pkcs1 padding
Does this mean that each time I use RSA_public_encrypt(), I need
to use
Following command always fails. I believe the behaviour is not what we
want. I attached a patch against s_client, s_server and s_time. Other
commands might also be suffered from the safe problem.
openssl s_client -verify 0 -connect somewhere
diff -Nru openssl-SNAP-20040330.orig/apps/s_client.c
Robert Urban wrote:
I'm wondering if the following but has been found and fixed. If so,
I'd really like to know about it.
backtrace:
- stunnel dies on a SIGSEGV
We have a similar problem on a SOLARIS/SPARC machine. A workaround is
the removal of the calls of ENGINE_load_builtin_engines and
You wrote:
Robert Urban wrote:
I'm wondering if the following but has been found and fixed. If so,
I'd really like to know about it.
backtrace:
- stunnel dies on a SIGSEGV
We have a similar problem on a SOLARIS/SPARC machine. A workaround is
the removal of the calls of
Hi there,
On March 29, 2004 04:26 am, Jelte Jansen wrote:
[snip]
Because I don't like to come empty-handed I took the liberty of
supplying a patch with a possible extension: rsa_gen.c gets another
function:
RSA * RSA_generate_key_bignum_exponent(int bits, BIGNUM *e,void
OpenSSL version: output of 'openssl version -a'
OpenSSL 0.9.7d 17 Mar 2004
built on: Thu Mar 25 21:53:07 2004
platform: VC-WIN32
options: bn(64,32) md2(int) rc4(idx,int) des(idx,cisc,4,long) idea
(int) blowfish(idx)
compiler: cl /MD /W3 /WX /G5 /Ox /O2 /Ob2 /Gs0 /GF /Gy /nologo -
I'm having this same problem with openssl 0.9.7d, though I'm not sure
how those patches would be applied.
David
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List
to use RAND_seed() to seed the The random number generator? For example,
if RSA_public_encrypt() is invoked in a loop, should RAND_seed()
also be
in the loop?
normally it should be sufficient to set the prng once
For RSA_NO_PADDING, do we need to set the prng? Seems no reason
David Soares via RT schrieb:,
I'm having this same problem with openssl 0.9.7d, though I'm not sure
how those patches would be applied.
in 0.9.7d most of the errors have been fixed,
fixed:
patch-doc-crypto-EVP_BytesToKey.pod
patch-doc-crypto-EVP_DigestInit.pod
patch-doc-crypto-ui.pod
Xinwen Fu wrote:
to use RAND_seed() to seed the The random number generator? For example,
if RSA_public_encrypt() is invoked in a loop, should RAND_seed()
also be
in the loop?
normally it should be sufficient to set the prng once
For RSA_NO_PADDING, do we need to set the prng? Seems no
This is a response to both ticket 704 and 856, which I merged together.
As of the response below, I can safely say that the issue has been
resolved.
Thanks for the reports and the reminders :-).
[guest - Fri Mar 26 14:10:04 2004]:
Sorry for my last double-posting. :-(
Happened due to
This problem has been fixed not long ago. Please download a recent 0.9.
7 snapshot and look for yourself.
I'm resolving this ticket.
[guest - Tue Mar 30 18:40:42 2004]:
OpenSSL version: output of 'openssl version -a'
OpenSSL 0.9.7d 17 Mar 2004
built on: Thu Mar 25 21:53:07 2004
In the Configure lines, the target interix_gcc_shared is refered to,
so it's obvious the patch for Makefile.org is missing, or you didn't
quite test everything (in this case, building shared libraries).
I'd be happy to apply your patches to the 0.9.7 and 0.9.8-dev branches,
as soon as it's
You're right it is definitely fixed in the snapshot. Sorry for the
inconvenience.
-Fiel
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Richard,
Sorry for the delay. The snapshot from after you asked me to test it the
first time (openssl-0.9.7-stable-SNAP-20040327) passed my tests.
Thanks,
Steven
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Richard Levitte via RT
Sent:
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 sponsoring my
Steven Reddie has now confirmed, on openssl-dev, that this issue is
resolved.
Thanks, Steve. Ticket resolved.
[levitte - Tue Mar 30 23:14:37 2004]:
I would very much like to know if my fix worked, so I can close this
ticket.
--
Richard Levitte
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm honestly very unsure about this one. After all, openssl ca
already covers this, so I wonder why there's a need to create another
way to do the same thing, and add to the confusion on how to do things..
.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Thu Apr 25 16:20:45 2002]:
What about the patch below for
I'm guessing that the definition of FAR is missing. The attached patch
might help. Please try it and get back to us.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Fri Mar 26 20:48:16 2004]:
While compiling openssl-0.9.7d on solaris9 with MIT kerberos support
krb5-1.3.2
either with cc 5.3 from sun or gcc
Richard Levitte via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 09:44:21 +0200
Subject: [openssl.org #859] openssl-0.9.7d compilation bug solaris9 kerberos
I'm guessing that the definition of FAR is missing. The attached patch
might help. Please try it and get back
20 matches
Mail list logo
