openssl-1.0.0a and glibc detected sthg ;)

2010-08-07 Thread Georgi Guninski
openssl-1.0.0a on ubuntu, debian and arch. attached a private key and a cert. ~/local/bin/openssl s_server -www -accept -cert /tmp/CA.cert -key /tmp/CA.key ~/local/bin/openssl s_client -connect localhost: depth=0 CN = CA verify return:1 *** glibc detected ***

Re: openssl-1.0.0a and glibc detected sthg ;)

2010-08-07 Thread Georgi Guninski
:21 PM, Georgi Guninski wrote: openssl-1.0.0a on ubuntu, debian and arch. attached a private key and a cert. ~/local/bin/openssl s_server -www -accept -cert /tmp/CA.cert -key /tmp/CA.key ~/local/bin/openssl s_client -connect localhost: depth=0 CN = CA verify return:1 *** glibc

Re: openssl-1.0.0a and glibc detected sthg ;)

2010-08-08 Thread Georgi Guninski
pointer. the testcase crashed browser links on arch linux too (when trying to connect to s_server -www). btw, it seems *important* to use |s_server| from *1.0.0a* On Sat, Aug 07, 2010 at 02:21:09PM +0300, Georgi Guninski wrote: openssl-1.0.0a on ubuntu, debian and arch. attached a private key

Re: openssl-1.0.0a and glibc detected sthg ;)

2010-08-08 Thread Georgi Guninski
is the certificate at http://marc.info/?l=openssl-devm=128118163216952w=2 (with the malformed key) *syntactically* correct modulo the bad self signature? with 1.0.0a ~/local/bin/openssl verify -check_ss_sig -CAfile /tmp/CA-P.cert /tmp/CA-P.cert /tmp/CA-P.cert: CN = CA error 7 at 0 depth

Re: openssl-1.0.0a and glibc detected sthg ;)

2010-08-09 Thread Georgi Guninski
hi, On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 10:36:03AM +0200, Mounir IDRASSI wrote: Hi, Signature verification is done through a modular exponentiation (using public exponent and modulus) that always leads to a result even fur a bogus RSA modulus. This result is checked against the PKCS#1 padding

Re: inconsistent timings for rsa sign/verify with 100K bit rsa keys

2010-09-02 Thread Georgi Guninski
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 05:34:49PM +0200, Mounir IDRASSI wrote: So, the modular exponentiation with the public exponent of key2 is 4 times slower that the signing operation of key1 and it should cost 4 x 5 min = 20 min which is very close to the 21 min you actually obtained. Does this