On 24-06-2010 19:25, Massimiliano Pala wrote:
Hi all,
I have a question for Win coders.. I am porting LibPKI, which is based on
OpenSSL, to Win OSes. On UNiX OSes we used pthread to initialize support
for threads in OpenSSL.
What is the best practice for Win OS ? Does anybody have some sample
On 24-06-2010 23:31, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
Hi Massimiliano,
If the locks need to be shared across processes, use a Mutex (the
mutexes can be named for separate processes, or the mutex can be
unnamed if Object Handle Inheritance is used (a flag to CreateProcess,
which is similar to fork(2))).
Hello,
I am building a PKCS#11 engine to an HSM. When I run:
openssl rsautl -sign -inkey id-of-private-key -keyform engine -in
file-data -out file-sign -engine My-engine-id
The engine executes the rsa_priv_enc function (I thought the engine would
execute rsa_sign, but this is not the problem).
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010, Nacho lvarez wrote:
Hello,
I am building a PKCS#11 engine to an HSM. When I run:
openssl rsautl -sign -inkey id-of-private-key -keyform engine -in
file-data -out file-sign -engine My-engine-id
The engine executes the rsa_priv_enc function (I thought the engine
According to my reading of BN_add.pod, BN_sub() does not allow its
result argument to be the same BIGNUM as one of the input values,
in particular, each of the following expressions will need a temporary
BIGNUM according to the documentation:
a -= b;
a = a - b;
a = b - a;
In
Hi Jakob,
Boy this is an argumentative list at times
As a Win32 guy, I understand your the finer points you are making.
Unfortunately, there are implicit assumptions that are being made
which are undermining your arguments. Put another way, its the attacks
which you *don't* know about which
Hi,
Does the openssl X509_verify certificate validation API support an argument
that supports skipping of signature and date validation?
Or is there any other way that I can achieve this optional verification.
Please help me out in this regard.
Regds,
Ashok.
Read my post again,
I did not say that NULL DACLs are not obviously dangerous (they are
and have been deprecated since the mid 1990s). I said that a
NULL SECURITY_ATTRIBUTES does not result in a NULL DACL but something
much less dangerous.
If you found a way to make the SRM assign a NULL DACL
Hi Jakob,
I do agree with you that a NULL SecAttrib will get you a default
descriptor. After sending the post (before you jumped on it), I wanted
to preface the statement with some hand waiving. What constitutes a
default descriptor is somewhat of a moving target when over the
Windows OS's and
