Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
>
> I've done a quick check setting rsa->e to NULL in rsautl and it seems to work
> just fine: the security checks aren't performed if 'e' is NULL. That's using
> the -sign option which goes through RSA_private_encrypt().
>
> What made you think this function returned -1
Bernhard Froehlich wrote:
>>
> If you could detail your intended use it may be clearer for me why you
> want to do that.
> Remember that it's very easy to do wrong things in cryptographic
> applications, so I'm always a bit suspicious if someone has a "non
> standard use"... ;)
>
Actually, I do not
Victor Duchovni wrote:
>
> The private key is for signing and decryption, the public key is for
> signature verification and encryption... Do not encrypt/decrypt arbitrary
> data with RSA (only suitable message digests, session keys, and other
> standard uses).
>
Thanks for your answer.
But why d
Concerning the function: int RSA_private_encrypt(...);
This function returns "-1" when the public exponent "e" is NULL. But, as
far as I know, the RSA encryption with the private key only needs:
- public modulus "n" and
- private exponent "d"
to be mentioned in the RSA structure.
Is the RSA_p
