AW: via padlock support much slower in 0.9.8e than in 0.9.8d, why?

ASM_PART_WORDS -DOPENSSL_IA32_SSE2 > -DSHA1_ASM -DMD5_ASM - DRMD160_ASM -DAES_ASM available timing > options: TIMES TIMEB HZ=100 [sysconf value] timing function > used: times The 'numbers' are in 1000s of bytes per second processed. > type 16 bytes 64 bytes

via padlock support much slower in 0.9.8e than in 0.9.8d, why?

With a VIA C5 board I get a huge difference in speed with engine padlock support (same machine same OS etc.). Where is the difference coming from. Are there any changes regarding buffering or block sizes? Look at this results: 0.9.8e: #./openssl speed -evp aes-256-cbc -engine padlock engine "pad

AW: Configuration file for subjectAltName

: Configuration file for subjectAltName On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 09:17:23PM +0200, Buddy Butterfly wrote: > # subjectAltName = @alt_names > > should be uncommented :-) Did you read the comment above that line. > # Verisign managed PKI, does not yet support subjectAlt

AW: Configuration file for subjectAltName

# subjectAltName = @alt_names should be uncommented :-) -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von Victor Duchovni Gesendet: Dienstag, 18. September 2007 21:06 An: openssl-users@openssl.org Betreff: Re: Configuration file for subject