On Fri, Aug 17, 2001 at 06:42:35PM +0200, Lutz Jaenicke wrote:
I first found them because I wanted my wrapping x509req.get_subject() to
exist even when x509req is destroyed, so therefore the rather odd do I
need them? question.
Hmm, seems that *_dup() might fulfill your requirement...
Hi
Obviously I can't sign the request when I don't have the private key.
So the (maybe stupid) question is:
Is it at all possible somehow to make a PKCS#10 without a private key?
Sorry maybe I'm stupid but why can't sign request ?
Are you using RSA or memory smartcard ?
The problem is that
The file you have sent was infected with a virus but InterScan E-Mail VirusWall
could not clean it.
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL
Destinatario, il sistema antivirus ha individuato un virus nel file allegato.
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:58:35 +0200 (W. Europe Daylight Time)
Method: Mail
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
File: Emanuel.exe
Action: clean failed - deleted
Virus:
The MessageLabs Virus Control Centre discovered a possible
virus or unauthorised code (such as a joke program or trojan)
in an email sent by you.
Please read this whole email carefully. It explains what has
happened to your email, which suspected virus has been caught,
and what to do if you
The MessageLabs Virus Control Centre discovered a possible
virus or unauthorised code (such as a joke program or trojan)
in an email sent by you.
Please read this whole email carefully. It explains what has
happened to your email, which suspected virus has been caught,
and what to do if you
The file you have sent was infected with a virus but InterScan E-Mail VirusWall
could not clean it.
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL
Sender, InterScan has detected virus(es) in your e-mail attachment.
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 03:12:16 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Method: Mail
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
File: Emanuel.exe
Action: clean failed - deleted
Virus: TROJ_NAVIDAD.E
This message was rejected by the mail hub at The University of
Birmingham (bham.ac.uk) because it has an apparently
executable attachment Emanuel.exe.
The email rejected was not delivered to the following
recipients: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Executable
Antigen for Exchange found Emanuel.exe infected with Win32 (Norman,Sophos)
virus.
The file is currently Removed. The message, Re: quick and dirty tunnel to
SSL ?, was
sent from =?ks_c_5601-1987?B?uem787z2?= and was discovered in IMC
Queues\Inbound
located at NDS/NDS-JER/NDSILBRIDGE.
Hello openssl-users,
I use openssl in one server application, thus, i would like to have no
memory leaks. I noticed that then more crypts/decrypts/key creation i do then more
memory my app uses. So, i have question :
do i need to clean something after enc = EVP_des_ede3_cbc(); ?
does
Hello openssl-users,
This is repeat, but i stil didnt get responce on it , and problem
still remains. If its only problem at me , just do this test please,
and see, if works ok... please
I use openssl pretty long time, but only in simple mode. Recently ,
installed version 96b (major release)
On Mon, 20 Aug 2001 13:33:18 +0200, Michael Ströder
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because the mailing list processor is configured to set the Reply-To
address to the list address. IMHO this should be changed to reduce
such problems with automatic replies (vacation e-mails, virus-scans
etc.).
But
Hello,
can somebody help me to configure my openssl.cnf ( or other things ) to
remove the E-Mail Field as a part of the subject ( and Issuer ) DN
within a certificate ?
Thanks for your Help.
Regards,
Robert Hannemann
Computer Center
Saxony-Anhalt
Germany
+49 345 1304 883
Destinatario, il sistema antivirus ha individuato un virus nel file allegato.
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:14:23 +0200 (W. Europe Daylight Time)
Method: Mail
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
File: Emanuel.exe
Action: clean failed - deleted
Virus:
Antigen for Exchange found Emanuel.exe infected with W32/Navidad.e@M (McAfee4) virus.
The file is currently Removed. The message, Re: quick and dirty tunnel to SSL ?, was
sent from =?ks_c_5601-1987?B?uem787z2?= and was discovered in SMTP Messages\Inbound
located at Corrent Organization/First
Antigen for Exchange found Emanuel.exe infected with W32/Navidad.e@M (McAfee4) virus.
The file is currently Removed. The message, Re: quick and dirty tunnel to SSL ?, was
sent from =?ks_c_5601-1987?B?uem787z2?= and was discovered in SMTP Messages\Inbound
located at Corrent Organization/First
Antigen for Exchange found Emanuel.exe infected with Win32 (Norman,Sophos)
virus.
The file is currently Removed. The message, Re: quick and dirty tunnel to
SSL ?, was
sent from =?ks_c_5601-1987?B?uem787z2?= and was discovered in IMC
Queues\Inbound
located at NDS/NDS-JER/NDSILBRIDGE.
Sender, InterScan has detected virus(es) in your e-mail attachment.
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:28:00 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Method: Mail
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
File: Emanuel.exe
Action: clean failed - deleted
Virus: TROJ_NAVIDAD.E
Receiver, InterScan has detected virus(es) in the e-mail attachment.
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:28:00 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Method: Mail
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
File: Emanuel.exe
Action: clean failed - deleted
Virus:
Receiver, InterScan has detected virus(es) in the e-mail attachment.
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:21:43 +0200 (W. Europe Daylight Time)
Method: Mail
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
File: Emanuel.exe
Action: deleted
Virus: TROJ_NAVIDAD.E
Sender, InterScan has detected virus(es) in your e-mail attachment.
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:28:07 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Method: Mail
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
File: Emanuel.exe
Action: clean failed - deleted
Virus: TROJ_NAVIDAD.E
Receiver, InterScan has detected virus(es) in the e-mail attachment.
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:28:07 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Method: Mail
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
File: Emanuel.exe
Action: clean failed - deleted
Virus:
Antigen for Exchange found Emanuel.exe infected with W32/Navidad-B (Sophos)
virus.
The file is currently Removed. The message, quick and dirty tunnel to SSL
?, was
sent from and was discovered in Wilt, Paul\Inbox
located at BellHowell/UMI Ann Arbor/AAMAIL01.
Antigen for Exchange found Emanuel.exe infected with W32/Navidad-B (Sophos)
virus.
The file is currently Removed. The message, quick and dirty tunnel to SSL
?, was
sent from and was discovered in Wilt, Paul\Inbox
located at BellHowell/UMI Ann Arbor/AAMAIL01.
[not setting Reply-To]
But that would make *regular* replies a pain in the ass for list
members.
The amount of such accidents like this one or the vacation mail
disaster that seems to hit this list every few weeks is much more
than on any other high-volume list that I know. I think the
The file you have sent was infected with a virus but InterScan E-Mail VirusWall
could not clean it.
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL
Receiver, InterScan has detected virus(es) in the e-mail attachment.
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:29:02 +0200 (W. Europe Daylight Time)
Method: Mail
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
File: Emanuel.exe
Action: clean failed - deleted
Virus:
Antigen for Exchange found Emanuel.exe infected with Win32 virus.
The file is currently Deleted. The message, quick and dirty tunnel to SSL
?, was
sent from ¹é»ó¼ö and was discovered in Raji Abdelaziz\Inbox
located at Breakwater Communications/BREAKWATER/NT2.
[not setting Reply-To]
But that would make *regular* replies a pain in the ass for list
members.
The amount of such accidents like this one or the vacation mail
disaster that seems to hit this list every few weeks is much more
than on any other high-volume list that I know. I think the
Because the mailing list processor is configured to set the Reply-To
address to the list address. IMHO this should be changed to reduce
such problems with automatic replies (vacation e-mails, virus-scans
etc.).
But that would make *regular* replies a pain in the ass for list
members.
I
Your message was rejected because it has
an apparently executable attachment Emanuel.exe.
Please read http://www.scms.waikato.ac.nz/help/mail/policy.html
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
This message was rejected by the mail hub at The University of
Birmingham (bham.ac.uk) because it has an apparently
executable attachment Emanuel.exe.
The email rejected was not delivered to the following
recipients: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Executable
Hi,
I'm trying to create an library for transfering special info between
an client and a webserver. But I have run into some strange problems.
I can connect to all kinds of webservers but one is allways failing.
I've debugged with returning the sslstate within the program, giving me:
Before
On Mon, 20 Aug 2001 05:00:01 -0700,
Caliban Tiresias Darklock [EMAIL PROTECTED] (ctd) writes:
ctd On Mon, 20 Aug 2001 13:33:18 +0200, Michael Ströder
ctd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because the mailing list processor is configured to set the Reply-To
address to the list address. IMHO this
Mittente, il sistema antivirus ha individuato un virus nel file allegato.
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:14:23 +0200 (W. Europe Daylight Time)
Method: Mail
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
File: Emanuel.exe
Action: clean failed - deleted
Virus:
-Original Message-
From: Amos Gouaux [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 20 August 2001 14:03
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Please reconfigure majordomo to not set Reply-To (was:
Failed to clean virus file Emanuel.exe)
On Mon, 20 Aug 2001 05:00:01 -0700,
Caliban Tiresias Darklock
What does SSL_CTRL_EXTRA_CHAIN_CERT mean when returned from
SSL_accept()?
Also, is there any documentation as to the meaning of any of that type
of definition (openssl/ssl.h line 826-870)?
--
Nathan Bell
Companion Corporation
Evelyn Manufacturing
801-943-7277
Etc...
));
On Mon, Aug 20, 2001 at 09:14:54AM -0600, Nathan Bell wrote:
What does SSL_CTRL_EXTRA_CHAIN_CERT mean when returned from
SSL_accept()?
??? Since when does SSL_accept() return SSL_CTRL_EXTRA_CHAIN_CERT?
Also, is there any documentation as to the meaning of any of that type
of definition
On Mon, Aug 20, 2001 at 03:18:20PM +0200, Carsten Rhod Gregersen wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to create an library for transfering special info between
an client and a webserver. But I have run into some strange problems.
I can connect to all kinds of webservers but one is allways failing.
The file you have sent was infected with a virus but InterScan E-Mail VirusWall
could not clean it.
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL
The file you have sent was infected with a virus but InterScan E-Mail VirusWall
could not clean it.
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL
Your message was rejected because it has
an apparently executable attachment Emanuel.exe.
Please read http://www.scms.waikato.ac.nz/help/mail/policy.html
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Your message was rejected because it has
an apparently executable attachment Emanuel.exe.
Please read http://www.scms.waikato.ac.nz/help/mail/policy.html
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Sender, InterScan has etected virus(es) in your e-mail attachment.
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:58:45 +0200 (W. Europe Daylight Time)
Method: Mail
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
File: QUA1C129477534DCA0.txt
Action: deleted
Virus: TROJ_NAVIDAD.E
Sender, InterScan has etected virus(es) in your e-mail attachment.
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:57:49 +0200 (W. Europe Daylight Time)
Method: Mail
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
File: QUA1C129466D2ADE20.txt
Action: deleted
Virus: TROJ_NAVIDAD.E
Receiver, InterScan has detected virus(es) in the e-mail attachment.
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:57:49 +0200 (W. Europe Daylight Time)
Method: Mail
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
File: QUA1C129466D2ADE20.txt
Action: deleted
Virus: TROJ_NAVIDAD.E
I'm in agreement, there is a reason that most mailers have a Reply-All or
Reply-Group function after all. Don't munge Reply-To!
- Original Message -
From: Steven Reddie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 11:09 AM
Subject: RE: Please reconfigure
I'm writing a program that uses openssl to read the
private key from a ASN1.DER encoded file. The openssl
API outputs the following:
17752:error:0D080071::lib(13) :func(128)
:reason(113):a_int.c:191:
17752:error:0D09D082::lib(13) :func(157)
:reason(130):d2i_r_pr.c:124:
I'm using the load_key()
Hi,
I'm attempting to sign a certificate request using the CA.pl script included
with OpenSSL.
Configuration:
-Slackware 8
-OpenSSL 0.9.6b
When I attempt to issue the ./CA.pl -sign command I get the following error:
[16:56:42][root@victory-260]# ./CA.pl -sign
Using configuration from
On Mon, Aug 20, 2001 at 01:33:18PM +0200, Michael Ströder wrote:
I just wonder why this program send this info to the list and not
to the person who sent the virus ;-)
Because the mailing list processor is configured to set the Reply-To
address to the list address. IMHO this should be
From: Tom Biggs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tbiggs I'm on another list, where emails are set up to Reply-To the list,
tbiggs and we *never* see any auto-reply, virus warnings, could-not-deliver,
tbiggs or any other spurious auto-generated mails. And it's been that way
tbiggs for years, so I doubt the
From: Kees Zeelenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: openssl for MS-Windows
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 22:36:10 +0200
Message-ID: 004201c129b7$c449a800$ed2cfb3e@beta
kees.zeelenberg Can I ask you to mail us the exact changes in form of a
kees.zeelenberg patch or something like that, so OpenSSL
From: Nathan Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
nbell There is already support for drop-in cryptography, but doing drop-in
nbell memory management seems like a more highly applicable feature. After
nbell already having done this I realize that it is not a daunting task. It
nbell would've been even better
54 matches
Mail list logo
