Re: Why CA-signed OCSP responders are a bad idea [WAS:Is it me or is ocsp.comodoca.com doing something wrong?]

2013-06-14 Thread Ryan Hurst
Btw let me know if I can ever be of help. Ryan Hurst Chief Technology Officer GMO Globalsign twitter: @rmhrisk email: ryan.hu...@globalsign.com phone: 206-650-7926 Sent from my phone, please forgive the brevity. On Jun 14, 2013, at 3:09 PM, Jakob Bohm wrote: > On 6/13/2013 1:50 AM, Ryan Hurst

Re: Why CA-signed OCSP responders are a bad idea [WAS:Is it me or is ocsp.comodoca.com doing something wrong?]

2013-06-14 Thread Ryan Hurst
I forgot to respond the the 1 minute reference, we revoke right away and most CAs do that is just different than pre producing all revoked responses when one cert is revoked. Ryan Hurst Chief Technology Officer GMO Globalsign twitter: @rmhrisk Sent from my phone, please forgive the brevity. O

RE: Why CA-signed OCSP responders are a bad idea [WAS:Is it me or is ocsp.comodoca.com doing something wrong?]

2013-06-14 Thread Ryan Hurst
I agree 2560's lack of algorithm agility is a problem and RFC6960's lack of specifying an indicator of which algorithm to use is also a little problematic; that said it is one that can be worked around in most cases. One likely way is that responders will rely on the User Agent header to determine

Re: Why CA-signed OCSP responders are a bad idea [WAS:Is it me or is ocsp.comodoca.com doing something wrong?]

2013-06-14 Thread Jakob Bohm
On 6/15/2013 1:15 AM, Ryan Hurst wrote: Thanks for your reply, just one tidbit that surprised me: CAs are required to produce responses every 7 days, we comply with that but as part of our new infrastructure investment we will be bringing that time down quite a bit; the largest issue here being

RE: Why CA-signed OCSP responders are a bad idea [WAS:Is it me or is ocsp.comodoca.com doing something wrong?]

2013-06-14 Thread Ryan Hurst
Jakob, Online CA signing keys for something like OCSP signing is a bad idea and don't worry we wont do that; we are looking at doing is using pre-produced OCSP for issuing CAs issued certificates; in this model all cache-misses and root responses would be VA delegated still. This protects the CA

Re: Degenerate DH key vulnerability in 0.9.8?

2013-06-14 Thread Jakob Bohm
On 6/14/2013 11:12 PM, Matt Caswell wrote: On 14 June 2013 01:55, Jakob Bohm wrote: On 6/12/2013 11:35 PM, Matt Caswell wrote: On 12 June 2013 21:15, Jakob Bohm wrote: As for the DH_check_pub_key() function, checking if pubkey is in the range "two to large prime minus 2, inclusive" is an

Re: A question on EVP_PKEY_copy_parameters

2013-06-14 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 12:02:52PM -0700, anu.engineer wrote: > Just before signing the certificate the code executes this fragment > > pktmp=X509_get_pubkey(ret); > if (EVP_PKEY_missing_parameters(pktmp) && > !EVP_PKEY_missing_parameters(pkey)) > EVP_PKEY_copy_parameters(pktmp,pkey); > E

Re: Why CA-signed OCSP responders are a bad idea [WAS:Is it me or is ocsp.comodoca.com doing something wrong?]

2013-06-14 Thread Jakob Bohm
On 6/13/2013 1:50 AM, Ryan Hurst wrote: They are doing a CA signed OCSP response, this is legitimate. We will do this in the not so distant future as well for many of our responses also. Please don't! As a knowledgeable GlobalSign customer I would prefer that you keep your root private keys

Re: A question on EVP_PKEY_copy_parameters

2013-06-14 Thread anu engineer
Hi Dave, This is a very detailed and excellent answer, Thank you very much Anu On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:59 PM, Dave Thompson wrote: > >From: owner-openssl-us...@openssl.org On Behalf Of anu.engineer > >Sent: Wednesday, 12 June, 2013 15:03 > > > I am reading thru the ca.c in the apps director

Re: Degenerate DH key vulnerability in 0.9.8?

2013-06-14 Thread Matt Caswell
On 14 June 2013 01:55, Jakob Bohm wrote: > On 6/12/2013 11:35 PM, Matt Caswell wrote: >> >> On 12 June 2013 21:15, Jakob Bohm wrote: > > >> As for the DH_check_pub_key() function, checking if pubkey is in the >> range "two to large prime minus 2, inclusive" is an insufficient chec

Re: EC command line tools

2013-06-14 Thread Steve Tarzia
On 6/14/13 2:47 PM, Matt Caswell wrote: On 14 June 2013 20:12, Steve Tarzia wrote: I am having some trouble finding documentation or examples showing how to perform Elliptic Curve crypto operations using the openssl command line tool. Is possible to perform EC encryption and decryption using t

Re: EC command line tools

2013-06-14 Thread Matt Caswell
On 14 June 2013 20:12, Steve Tarzia wrote: > I am having some trouble finding documentation or examples showing how to > perform Elliptic Curve crypto operations using the openssl command line > tool. Is possible to perform EC encryption and decryption using the openssl > command line tool? > > I

EC command line tools

2013-06-14 Thread Steve Tarzia
I am having some trouble finding documentation or examples showing how to perform Elliptic Curve crypto operations using the openssl command line tool. Is possible to perform EC encryption and decryption using the openssl command line tool? In "man pkeyutl" for version 1.0.1e I see the text "

openssl 1.0.1e Signature verification problems

2013-06-14 Thread anand rao
Hi,  I am using openssl 1.0.1e to create a CA and generate certificates. I am facing an issue while generating the device certificates. After creating the ca certificate using below command # openssl req -x509 -new -newkey rsa:1024 -keyout private/cakey.pem -days 3650 -out cacert.pem when we

Re: Proplem with RSA_private_encrypt and OAEP

2013-06-14 Thread Dr. Stephen Henson
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013, Robert Inzinger - SKIDATA wrote: > Hi > > I try to use RSA_private_encrypt and OAEP and always get the error at the > call of RSA_private_encrypt : > RSA_private_encrypt() is used for signing data whereas OAEP is a padding mode used for encryption. You'd need to use RSA_pu

Re: PBKDF2 implementation

2013-06-14 Thread Dr. Stephen Henson
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013, Rengith M. wrote: > > I could not find the p5_crpt2.c under \crypto\evp after I unzipped the > openssl-fips-ecp-2.0.4.tar, could you please provide the correct > installation script needed for WinXP. > > It is not present in the FIPS module source. Steve. -- Dr Stephen

Re: PBKDF2 implementation

2013-06-14 Thread Michel
Hi Rengith, Sorry but I was referring to 1.0.1e source distribution. I am not able to answer about FIPS ones. Le 14/06/2013 11:06, Rengith M. a écrit : Hi Michel, I could not find the p5_crpt2.c under \crypto\evp after I unzipped the openssl-fips-ecp-2.0.4.tar, could you please provide the co

Re: PBKDF2 implementation

2013-06-14 Thread Michel
PKCS5_PBKDF2_HMAC implementation : [openssl-src-dir]\crypto\evp\p5_crpt2.c in [openssl-src-dir]\crypto\evp\evp.h : PKCS5_SALT_LEN is defined as 8 Le 13/06/2013 08:39, Rengith M. a écrit : Hi, This is to know further about implementation of PBKDF2, PKCS5_PBKDF2_HMAC. 1.Would like to know

RE: PBKDF2 implementation

2013-06-14 Thread Rengith M.
Hi Michel, I could not find the p5_crpt2.c under \crypto\evp after I unzipped the openssl-fips-ecp-2.0.4.tar, could you please provide the correct installation script needed for WinXP. Thanks and Regards, Rengith M. From: Michel [mailto:msa...@paybox.com] Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013

Proplem with RSA_private_encrypt and OAEP

2013-06-14 Thread Robert Inzinger - SKIDATA
Hi I try to use RSA_private_encrypt and OAEP and always get the error at the call of RSA_private_encrypt : Error code: 4066076 in .\crypto\rsa\rsa_eay.c line 6029358. Samplecode: void SimpleTest() { RSA * rsa; RSA * rsapub; RSA * rsapri; unsigned char src[1000] = "

Re: Timestamp reply validation

2013-06-14 Thread Nicolas ROCHE
Hi, Sorry, I forgot the "-cert" option during the query. Nicolas. Le 13/06/2013 11:34, Nicolas ROCHE a écrit : Hello, I'm beginning with TSA and I'm wondering if it is possible to validate a timestamp request against a unique (self signed) certificate. Now I can do : $ openssl ts -verify -quer