In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 04 Jul 2005 13:41:17 -0400, Uri <[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]> said:

urimobile> Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
urimobile> 
urimobile> >>> >What makes you think the private key is included?
urimobile> >urimobile> 
urimobile> >urimobile> The fact that Windows XP machine (into which I
urimobile> >urimobile> load the created cert) claims to now have the
urimobile> >urimobile> private key for it.
urimobile> >
urimobile> >Uhmmm, in a X.509 PKI, you need a key pair (private and
urimobile> >public key) to have it work at all.  In Windows, the
urimobile> >computer stores them for you.  Where did you think the
urimobile> >private keys would be stored?  In your head?  Are you
urimobile> >willing to remember and type 1024 or more bits (in
urimobile> >whatever format)?  Thought not...
urimobile> >
urimobile> Look, I'd be very obliged if you took the trouble to
urimobile> understand the actual questions before jumping the gun with
urimobile> answers that are less than helpful.

Well, considering the small amount of facts you actually gave, you
can't be surprised that I had to use my imagination to try to
understand what you had done.  Contrary to what you seem to think, it
was less than obvious.

Still, my appologies for the tone I used.  It was needlessly harsh.

urimobile> For example, you didn't seem to comprehend that CA's
urimobile> (self-signed) cert goes to the Windows box (which is a
urimobile> client and a member of the realm of this CA), and in
urimobile> addition to that - Windows box stores the server's cert,
urimobile> with who it corresponds.

It's fine for any box to store or cache certificates of any kind.
Certificates are public data, and only contain a public key.

urimobile> We are NOT talking about key pair that belongs to this
urimobile> Windows box (where private key is necessary).  Now I've
urimobile> described it with plenty of details.

Nope:

urimobile> NOW Windows box claims that it holds NOT ONLY the server's
urimobile> public key (which was expected), but ALSO the server's
urimobile> PRIVATE KEY.

This is the first time you said that *another* device's private key
ended up on your Windows box.  And still, that can't happen because of
a CSR, which is what you claimed was at fault.

However, it seems you found something:

urimobile> Also, here's an example of openssl-created "newreq.pem" on
urimobile> my box:

(I assume, BTW, that you used CA.pl here)

urimobile> -----BEGIN RSA PRIVATE KEY-----
urimobile> Proc-Type: 4,ENCRYPTED
urimobile> DEK-Info: DES-EDE3-CBC,D002B0C9C6F377C7
urimobile> 
urimobile> wSqix6TJp...........................................................
urimobile> 
.........................................................................
urimobile> .................................................tuJZYOyg==
urimobile> -----END RSA PRIVATE KEY-----
urimobile> -----BEGIN CERTIFICATE REQUEST-----
urimobile> MIIBqTCC................................
urimobile> .................................................
urimobile> ..................................FalOz
urimobile> -----END CERTIFICATE REQUEST-----
urimobile> 
urimobile> Looks like it concatenates private key and the actual cert
urimobile> request together.

Yup.  I was in disbelief, but just checked CA.pl (which I usually
don't use), and saw this really happens.  I'd call that a bug, that's
not the way it should be, in my opinion (translated: that's completely
f*cked!).

urimobile> Thank you. It works. So now I'll need to dig up the exact
urimobile> format of X.509 cert.

The quickest way to find that information is by reading RFC3280.

Cheers,
Richard

-----
Please consider sponsoring my work on free software.
See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details.

-- 
Richard Levitte                         [EMAIL PROTECTED]
                                        http://richard.levitte.org/

"When I became a man I put away childish things, including
 the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."
                                                -- C.S. Lewis
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List                    openssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager                           [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to