On 12/05/2015 21:45, Nico Williams wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 08:23:34PM +0200, Jakob Bohm wrote:
How about the following simplifications for the new
extension, lets call it GSS-2 (at least in this e-mail).
1. GSS (including SASL/GS2) is always done via the SPNego
GSS mechanism, which
On 12/05/2015 22:50, Marcus Vinicius do Nascimento wrote:
I did some quick research and found this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Signature_Algorithm
If my understanding is correct, the public key is (p, q, g, y).
The private key would be x, such that y = g^x mod p.
Is there some
Hello everyone,
I have a server that is supposed to accept only one client. The connection
works just fine. When I tried to connect to the server with a second client
while another connection is already active, I expected that the 2nd client
would return some error code, but instead it crashes
On 08/05/15 09:40, Matt Caswell wrote:
On 08/05/15 02:28, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
Regardless, the inability to improve the support in this area has left
the those organizations that rely upon 2712 with the choice of use
insecure protocols or re-implement the applications. I do not
On 5/13/2015 3:17 PM, Nico Williams wrote:
Kerberos in particular supports PROT_READY. There is no Kerberos IV GSS
mechanism, FYI. I'd never heard of GSS-SRP-6a; do you have a reference?
Nico,
Look for draft-burdis-cat-srp-sasl. It was never standardized but I
believe there is an
We're closer.
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 07:10:10PM +0200, Jakob Bohm wrote:
On 13/05/2015 17:46, Nico Williams wrote:
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 12:03:33PM +0200, Jakob Bohm wrote:
On 12/05/2015 21:45, Nico Williams wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 08:23:34PM +0200, Jakob Bohm wrote:
How about the
For the TL;DR: My original quick writeup included some
mistakes in the details of TLS (forgot about Finished
messages) and SASL/GS2. It is thus in more than
anticipated need of change before it can become a
proper spec, finding and fixing such mistakes is the
main benefit of having this kind of
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 12:03:33PM +0200, Jakob Bohm wrote:
On 12/05/2015 21:45, Nico Williams wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 08:23:34PM +0200, Jakob Bohm wrote:
How about the following simplifications for the new
extension, lets call it GSS-2 (at least in this e-mail).
1. GSS (including
From: openssl-users On Behalf Of Marcus Vinicius do Nascimento
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 16:50
I did some quick research and found this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Signature_Algorithm
If my understanding is correct, the public key is (p, q, g, y).
You might want to look at the
I wonder if we could do this in the KITTEN WG list. Maybe not every
extension to TLS needs to be treated as a TLS WG work item... We should
ask the security ADs.
Nico
--
___
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe:
10 matches
Mail list logo
