and what are all the other threads doing? some other thread must already
own this lock and is waiting on something else.
-lee
On 2014-01-10 13:11, Tayade, Nilesh wrote:
Hi,
I am facing a deadlock issue on openssl1.0.1e. Please see the stack below.
Could anyone please advise if this is a
]@--(_)[EMAIL PROTECTED]@--
Richard Koenning wrote:
Lee Dilkie wrote:
Perhaps I'm getting confused with what's reported.
I just noticed that SSLv3 gets reported even when I specify TLS
methods on the client and server. ie.
cipher spec=AES256-SHA SSLv3 Kx=RSA Au=RSA
Enc=AES(256
Perhaps I'm getting confused with what's reported.
I just noticed that SSLv3 gets reported even when I specify TLS methods
on the client and server. ie.
cipher spec=AES256-SHA SSLv3 Kx=RSA Au=RSA
Enc=AES(256) Mac=SHA1
Is this really SSLv3 or is it TLS?
Kyle Hamilton
Hey Folks,
I've hit a bit of a wall here. I want to build a simple client and
server that can handle SSL and TLS connections. It's not turning out as
simple as it looks and googling hasn't yielded a solution either.
Put simply. If I create a client-server where one end uses
TLSv1_method()
Are you sure it *actually* worked? The function call will appear to succeed,
but win2K and above don't allow programs to set TOS anymore, unless you
fiddle with the registry to override the default behaviour.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf
IMHO if you want to use multiple email addresses within the
same certificate
you should use multiple subjectAltName extensions. This
ensures usability
with available clients (i.e. Mozilla, Thunderbird, etc... ).
I guess you
are able to use the certificate because the same addresses
are
the same with an openssl generated
certificate.
-lee
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Michael Helm
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 3:55 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Creating certificates with more than one eMail address
Lee Dilkie
Most of the errors seem to be in one of these classes:
- Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
- Use of uninitialized value
When I run it in my own code (which seems correct to me), I
see this also:
- Syscall param write(buf) contains uninitialised or
unaddressable
CN=pop.xxx.com
CN=smtp.xxx.com
CN=www.xxx.com
That way, pop3, smtp and https can use the same certificate
and the clients
won't complain of a name mismatch.
How do add (or create) multiple CNs in a certificate?
I used openssl to create a root certificate and then used it again
the server name shows up as the CN in the server certificate,
for example.
i use the same certificate but I added all three names, ie.
CN=pop.xxx.com
CN=smtp.xxx.com
CN=www.xxx.com
That way, pop3, smtp and https can use the same certificate and the clients
won't complain of a name mismatch.
Depends on the attack itself?
are you worried about syn flood type attacks, on the tcp port itself?
or are you worried about ssl attacks that go through with ssl negotiation
and simply strive to consume processing resources?
the former has several solutions, including firewalls.
the later is
3) Provide a better explanation of what's wrong and where.
You say you're using a ppc603? What speed?
My experience with a ppc603 at 133Mhz says an SSL_accept takes about 1.3
seconds, most of it at full throttle on the processor. If this is your
experience (scaled by your processor speed) and
It always assumes that a certifcate will have an accessible
current CRL. As I
mentioned the absence of a CRLDP extension doesn't
necessarily mean that the CA
doesn't issue CRLs: just that it doesn't give details about
how to download
them in the certificate.
Steve.
Ok, so I didn't
13 matches
Mail list logo
