where applicable.
I would greatly appreciate feedback on this patch.
Best regards,
Johannes
From ae9c5bb1123db6b756af3d5114c7e0661c8b2e07 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Johannes Bauer dfnsonfsdu...@gmx.de
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 11:46:39 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Implement raw OID display
---
openssl
On 11.12.2013 17:14, Yanchuan Nian via RT wrote:
hi guys,
There is a bug in the implementation of AES_cbc_encrypt() on x86 architecture.
If the length of plaintext is not multiple of 16 bytes (must greater than 16),
the decoded message is different from the original. I tested it with a
Hi list,
I'm having the *exact* same issue that Jacques had 2 years ago:
https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-users/2015-June/001584.html
I.e., I'm writing an OpenSSL 1.0.2 engine that does ECDSA signing. In my
signing function, I want to verify the signature before leaving the
callback.
On 21.07.2017 14:00, Douglas E Engert wrote:
> It uses either:
> ops = ECDSA_METHOD_new((ECDSA_METHOD *)ECDSA_OpenSSL());
> or
> ops = EC_KEY_METHOD_new((EC_KEY_METHOD *)EC_KEY_OpenSSL());
>
> which copy the default structure to the new opaque structure.
> It then sets the routines it
On 21.07.2017 15:08, Douglas E Engert wrote:
> I don't see your problem with OpenSSL-1.1.0f. I don't recall seeing it with
> earlier version either. p11_ec.c does:
>
>
> 647 static EC_KEY_METHOD *ops = NULL;
> 648 int (*orig_sign)(int, const unsigned char *, int, unsigned
> char
On 21.07.2017 16:10, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 15:56 +0200, Johannes Bauer wrote:
>> I've changed my code now to also use the (mutable) new
>> EC_KEY_METHOD*,
>> which doesn't give a diagnostic. Regardless, I believe that the first
>> parameter of EC
Hi list,
I've been trying for a while to get scrypt and PBKDF2 exposed via the
command line interface. My original attempt was rejected and I thought I
wouldn't care anymore. But then I picked it up and implemented the route
that Stephen suggested (https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/1533).
produced. I took care to preserve
coding style and nomenclature where applicable.
I would greatly appreciate feedback on this patch.
Best regards,
Johannes
From ae9c5bb1123db6b756af3d5114c7e0661c8b2e07 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Johannes Bauer dfnsonfsdu...@gmx.de
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 11:46
On 11.12.2013 17:14, Yanchuan Nian via RT wrote:
hi guys,
There is a bug in the implementation of AES_cbc_encrypt() on x86 architecture.
If the length of plaintext is not multiple of 16 bytes (must greater than 16),
the decoded message is different from the original. I tested it with a
