could argue that a kernel module's
Operational Environment has no relation to the Linux distro, only to
the kernel it's loaded by and the hardware architecture (and perhaps the
compiler).
--
Henrik Grindal Bakken h...@ifi.uio.no
PGP ID: 8D436E52
Fingerprint: 131D 9590 F0CF 47EF 7963 02AF 9236
architecture (and perhaps the
compiler).
[...]
Logic doesn't really apply here...
I can see that... Oh well, thanks for the explanation.
--
Henrik Grindal Bakken h...@ifi.uio.no
PGP ID: 8D436E52
Fingerprint: 131D 9590 F0CF 47EF 7963 02AF 9236 D25A 8D43 6E52
situations is something like this:
static int post_cb(int op, int id, int subid, void *ex)
{
if (op == FIPS_POST_FAIL)
system(/bin/fipserror);
return 1;
}
And there somewhere:
FIPS_post_set_callback(post_cb);
--
Henrik Grindal Bakken h...@ifi.uio.no
PGP ID: 8D436E52
Fingerprint: 131D
way of doing
this that would make more sense.
From what I could dig out, PEM doesn't support encoding signatures.
Any suggestions?
--
Henrik Grindal Bakken h...@ifi.uio.no
PGP ID: 8D436E52
Fingerprint: 131D 9590 F0CF 47EF 7963 02AF 9236 D25A 8D43 6E52
fine under valgrind on my Fedora 14. Have you built
your openssl in a weird way (and why is it named libtestcrypto)?
(I had to add HMAC_CTX_cleanup(context) and free(context) to avoid
memory leak warnings from valgrind, though.)
--
Henrik Grindal Bakken h...@ifi.uio.no
PGP ID: 8D436E52
Fingerprint
Steve Marquess
marqu...@opensslfoundation.com writes:
Henrik Grindal Bakken wrote:
It's not really a fork; we do it mostly with a) configuration, and
b) limiting algorithms in our own code. We do have some patches,
though, and I suppose the best way forward is to pull in the tests
from
aerow...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 6:47 AM, Henrik Grindal Bakken h...@ifi.uio.no
wrote:
3) obtaining your own from-scratch validation starting with the
1.0.0 baseline. Good luck with that, you have a long row to hoe.
We're going for 3), but as I said, our crypto module
Steve Marquess
marqu...@opensslfoundation.com writes:
Henrik Grindal Bakken wrote:
Hello. I'm working on getting FIPS 140-2 certification on a
product which uses OpenSSL-1.0.0 for its crypto stuff. The crypto
module in my case is the entire product, so using the OpenSSL FIPS
module
, these tests have been removed in the 1.0.0 branch
from what I can see. Is there a reason for that? I realize that
re-certifying the 1.0.0 release is hard work, but are the tests alone
much work as well?
--
Henrik Grindal Bakken h...@ifi.uio.no
PGP ID: 8D436E52
Fingerprint: 131D 9590 F0CF 47EF
with counter mode, and when can betas and
final releases of what's currently in CVS/HEAD be expected?
--
Henrik Grindal Bakken h...@ifi.uio.no
PGP ID: 8D436E52
Fingerprint: 131D 9590 F0CF 47EF 7963 02AF 9236 D25A 8D43 6E52
__
OpenSSL
Dr. Stephen Henson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003, Henrik Grindal Bakken wrote:
Firstly, I want to make a signature on a file using a DSA key-pair.
I can do this for an RSA pair with 'openssl rsautl', but is there
something similar for DSA, or do I have to write it myself
11 matches
Mail list logo
