ons 2016-07-20 klockan 15:14 +0000 skrev Richard Levitte via RT: > On Mon Jul 11 11:34:35 2016, mattias.ell...@physics.uu.se wrote: > > > > I guess having a more restrictive accessor that only sets the > > EXFLAG_PROXY bit could work. I suggested the more general solution of > > having set/clear accessors for arbitrary flags since it was - well > > more > > general. > > So let me ask this in a different manner, does OpenSSL 1.1 still not set the > EXFLAG_PROXY flag correctly? In what situations does that happen? That may be > worth a bug report of its own. > > -- > Richard Levitte > levi...@openssl.org >
The answer to this is related to Mischa's reply, which unfortunately was only sent to the Debian BTS and not the the OpenSSL RT. I quote it below. As indicated in the answer, setting the EXFLAG_PROXY allows handling non-RFC proxies in OpenSSL. mån 2016-07-11 klockan 14:53 +0200 skrev Mischa Salle: > Hi Richard, Mattias, others, > > I agree with you that it would be nice if OpenSSL could figure out > itself whether a cert needs to be treated as a proxy, but currently that > doesn't work reliably as far as I know. > The flag is certainly needed in the case of non-RFC3820 proxies, also > known as legacy proxies. Unfortunately these are still very widely used > (majority of the proxies actually) and hence our code must be able to > handle them correctly. > > Best wishes, > Mischa Sallé >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature