[openssl-users] DRBG and prediction resistance

2015-05-07 Thread Bala Duvvuri
Hi All, What is the reason that the DRBG random generation function- fips_drbg_bytes does not consider prediction resistance as input? Inside fips_drbg_bytes rv = FIPS_drbg_generate(dctx, out, rcnt, 0, adin, adinlen); //prediction resistance disabled And as a result the entropy generation

[openssl-users] ECDSA with random number

2015-05-07 Thread Piotr Ɓobacz
As in the subject is it possible to generate signature with given random number? According to the documentation of ECDSA uses RNG so it would be difficult to find out private key from signature but i want just to test my data to check if signature is being generated properly and i have'nt found

[openssl-users] Default ciphersuite has changed from 1.0.1l to 1.0.2a?

2015-05-07 Thread Aaron
Hello, We have an OpenSSL application in which the client calls SSL_connect() to connect to the server. We upgraded the OpenSSL used inour application from 1.0.1l to 1.0.2a recently. When OpenSSL 1.0.1l was used, the ciphersuite the client got was ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA. When OpenSSL

Re: [openssl-users] Performance problems with OpenSSL and threading

2015-05-07 Thread John Foley
Not sure. Are you using blocking or non-blocking IO? Have you tried SSL_MODE_AUTO_RETRY? Do you notice a different return value from SSL_read() after a zero byte read compared to other errors? On 05/06/2015 07:12 PM, Bryan Call wrote: Do you know if there is a way from preventing a call to

Re: [openssl-users] Kerberos

2015-05-07 Thread Nathaniel McCallum
On Tue, 2015-05-05 at 09:21 +0100, Matt Caswell wrote: I am considering removing Kerberos support from OpenSSL 1.1.0. There are a number of problems with the functionality as it stands, and it seems to me to be a very rarely used feature. I'm interested in hearing any opinions on this

Re: [openssl-users] Kerberos

2015-05-07 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 08:00:17PM -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote: There have been some conversations behind Red Hat doors about improving the state of Kerberos/TLS in both standards and implementations. Could we maybe have a broader conversation about how to fix this situation? To be

Re: [openssl-users] Kerberos

2015-05-07 Thread Jeffrey Altman
On 5/7/2015 8:40 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 08:00:17PM -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote: There have been some conversations behind Red Hat doors about improving the state of Kerberos/TLS in both standards and implementations. Could we maybe have a broader conversation

Re: [openssl-users] [TLS] Update spec to match current practices for certificate chain order

2015-05-07 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 08:49:21AM +0300, Yoav Nir wrote: I think there was also discussion on this list at some point suggesting changing that MAY for omitting the root CA cert to a SHOULD or a MUST. (I think the argument for the latter was to reduce wasted bandwidth) Sorry, this is

Re: [openssl-users] ECDSA with random number

2015-05-07 Thread Thulasi Goriparthi
Hi Piotr, As you have found out, choosing the per message random number in ECDSA signature is crucial for the security of private key. Leaving this responsibility on users is dangerous. This is the reason you won't find any crypto API to feed the random number for ECDSA signature. If you want

Re: [openssl-users] ECDSA with random number

2015-05-07 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 10:28:49AM +0200, Piotr ?obacz wrote: According to the documentation of ECDSA uses RNG so it would be difficult to find out private key from signature but i want just to test my data to check if signature is being generated properly and I have'nt found any possible

Re: [openssl-users] Performance problems with OpenSSL and threading

2015-05-07 Thread Bryan Call
Do you know if there is a way from preventing a call to SSL_get_error() after getting a 0 byte read from SSL_read()? This is the main issue I am facing with the OpenSSL error locking right now. -Bryan On May 1, 2015, at 6:49 AM, Salz, Rich rs...@akamai.com wrote: Lock #1 is