Hello,
I noticed the announcement of some vulnerabilities in OpenSSL:
CVE-2009-0590, CVE-2009-0591 and CVE-2009-0789.
Solution would be to upgrade to 0.9.8k.
But I'm using the binary distribution of Apache (2.0.63 with OpenSSL 0.9.7m)
and there is no newer one available. I don't want to switch
I am getting following error while building the SSL in fips mode.
The FIPS object module was successfully build using fips1.2 version.
After which I tried following command to build OpenSSl 0.9.8j version:
./config fips
make
`lib' is up to date.
`fips_premain_dso' is up to date.
`fips_standalone_
Hello all,
There appears to be a syntax bug in the doc/apps/openssl.pod file.
On line 158 there is a missing greater-than sign at the end of the line.
Also, the pod2man that comes with the distribution does not work for a
couple of .pod files where the "first line" is not "NAME", as in:
=pod
I'm trying to upgrade from openssl-0.9.7a-43-7.2 to openssl-0.9.8k
I ran the ./config linux 86_64 command and :
make
make test
make install
I didn't see any errors, but when I do an rpm query I expect to see
openssl-0.9.8k but instead see
openssl-0.9.7a-43-7.2. What am I doing wrong?
I'm runn
On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 07:18:19AM -0500, Michael S. Zick wrote:
> On Sun June 7 2009, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> >
> > No proof is known that better algorithms won't come along, but for now
> > state of the-art number theory gives us GNFS.
> >
>
> Mathematics is an open-ended field on any subjec
I am looking to pass in a peer certificate, and probably a stack of x509
which contains all the ca and root certs. Then looking to return a stack of
x509 with the peer certificate, its ca certificate, and its root
certificate.
Thanks,
Jerry
On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Crypto Sal wrote:
> On
On Sun June 7 2009, Victor Duchovni wrote:
>
> No proof is known that better algorithms won't come along, but for now
> state of the-art number theory gives us GNFS.
>
Mathematics is an open-ended field on any subject for which
a proof does not exist.
Some 'great mind' may come along at any tim
On Sun, Jun 07, 2009, jaze lee wrote:
> That is , n = q*p , we can choose the prime has given bits, but we
> can not know all that prime in that range.if
> we want to know the range , we should test it every odd number in that
> range, or should find a function that can do the job efficiently .
>
Hi:
2009/6/2 Martin Kaiser :
> Hi,
>
> Thus wrote vichy (vichy@gmail.com):
>
>> but I cannot find aes128xcbc.
>
>> Do I miss something or there is really no support of aes128xcbc mode
>> in openssl? if the answer is the later, where I can find the sample
>> code of it.
>
> AES-XCBC-MAC is not
2009/6/7 Victor Duchovni :
> On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 09:51:14AM +0800, jaze lee wrote:
>
>> The problem is we can not find the function yet ? or some other ways
>> to judge a big integer whether it's a prime. Is it so-called
>> mathematics problem that many cipher based on it ?
>
> No answer to you
10 matches
Mail list logo
