Re: Using AES utilities in 3.0

On 2020-12-29 19:29, Narayana, Sunil Kumar wrote: > While migrating from 1.0.2 to 3.0 we observe that AES utility > functions are deprecated in 3.0. > Please suggest the equivalent replacements for these API that are been > currently used by our application > > AES_KEY --->St

Re: openssl with Rust

On 2020-06-24 10:23, Richard Levitte wrote: > I have very little knowledge of Rust... however, there seems to exist > an openssl crate available already: https://docs.rs/openssl/0.10.29/openssl/ > > Does that help? The OP mentioned using "the openssl crate", so I don't think that's the probl

[openssl-users] Hashing public keys

edied?). (Storing public keys in a DHT, users need to be able to - given a public key - generate a hash to check if the hash exists in the DHT). -- Kind Regards, Jan Danielsson -- openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] scripting creating a cert

openssl doesn't need any password inputs. -- Kind regards, Jan Danielsson -- openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] Better understanding of EC encryption API

On 26/11/15 20:18, Matt Loah wrote: > While the public key in the context of OpenSSL Elliptic Curves algorithm is > stored as a EC_POINT pointer... and the private key as a BIGNUM pointer... > which functions (or which kind of them) should be called to encrypt & to > decrypt a message in C/C++ ?

[openssl-users] Hashing public keys in EVP_PKEY's

Hello, If I would want to use the hash of a EVP_PKEY to uniquely identify the key (regardless of whether it contains the private key or not), what would be the best way to do this? (I.e. how do I deterministically hash the public key of a EVP_PKEY?). Performance is not a major concern.

Unable to set RSA_NO_PADDING?

Hello, Purely for a test case to see if a small wrapper library for EVP_DigestSign*() can output the exact same signature twice, I tried calling: if((rc = EVP_PKEY_CTX_set_rsa_padding(pctx, RSA_NO_PADDING)) <= 0) { print("failed with %d\n", rc); } With plain old PKCS1 and PKCS1

Re: the nature of the heartbeat issue (was Re: OpenSSL Security Advisory)

On 12/04/14 21:30, Matthias Apitz wrote: >> http://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commit;h=4817504d069b4c5082161b02a22116ad75f822b1 > > Thanks for the git diff (and the other statements). Could you please be > so kind and point to the exact place of the offending statement (or > missing b

Hash named certificate and standards?

at best - a defacto-standard? -- Kind regards, Jan Danielsson __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org Automated List

Re: conversion from pem to pkcs12

> commands. What does "text" means here? It means you want to be able to read (and understand) the output. -- Kind regards, Jan Danielsson signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Subject in DER format for PKCS#11

Hello, The PKCS#11 specification stipulates that certificate object should have a subject attribute which is DER encoded. Let's say I have an X509 structure in a C program. Is there an easy and direct way to get a DER encoded subject from it with OpenSSL? ___

Loading and using PKCS#12 in runtime

contain any entry for OpenSSL_add_all_algorithms. It does however have: 0009be20 T OpenSSL_add_all_ciphers 0009bc90 T OpenSSL_add_all_digests But I'm beginning to feel that I might be chasing the wrong end here. Can anyone find an immediate problem with how I'm using the PKCS#12 functions? -- Kind regards, Jan Danielsson signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

SNI in openssl 0.9.9-dev

Hello, My OS includes "openssl 0.9.9-dev". What are the chances my libssl will be able to handle SNI? (Assuming no options have been explicitly disabled, but not knowing if anything has been explicitly enabled). -- Kind regards, Jan Danielsson signature.asc Description: OpenP

Re: x509 vs ca

hange the meaning of the existing arguments. Would "-notbefore" and "-notafter" be suitable? I don't think I'm the only user to ever want to avoid "ca" because it adds a level of abstraction that I want to implement myself). (I think I tend to think of "x509" as the "lowlevel" version of "ca" - perhaps incorrectly - which is why I feel that "x509" should have at least the same level of precision with regards to notBefore/notAfter as "ca"). -- Kind regards, Jan Danielsson signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

x509 vs ca

ot;ca" which makes "x509" unsuitable for a self-signed CA to use for every day CSR signing operations? 2) Is there a reason "x509" doesn't have -startdate or -enddate? In my case, they are the only features I'm looking for which "ca" has. Other than tha