Hi Steve
I am sure that mantain compatibility is better than forcing standards
compliancy. But in this case i think that is possible to achieve a good
compromise offering to aplications both choices. In your kindly answer you said:
>Because if the received encoding is correct the attributes will
Checking the 9.5a version I have seen that the authenticatedAttribute
encoding is now ordered, but int the signature verify code I have also read the
following note:
/* Note: when forming the encoding of the attributes we
* shouldn't reorder them or this will break the signature.
Hi all.
Two months ago I finished the development of an open source
implementation of a Microsoft RSA FULL Cryptographic Service Provider. My
intention was to make it available through a site in a well packaged
distribution together with some documentation and comments. Now I realized
that I have
I've provided answers inline below.
Sergio Tabanelli
-Original Message-
From: Dr Stephen Henson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: giovedì 13 aprile 2000 16.55
Subject: Re: A new Microsoft security bulletin and the OffloadModExpo
functionality
>Yes I sa
Sorry but I've realized that I was not clear enough, so
> Does this also work with "unexportable" private
>keys?
Yes.
Sergio Tabanelli
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mail
Sorry but I've realized that I was not clear enough, so
> Does this also work with "unexportable" private
>keys?
Yes.
Sergio Tabanelli
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mail
Microsoft has released a new security bulletin
(http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms00-024.asp)
about a vulnerability in the NT registry permission setting for a
functionality called OffloadModExpo. I thanks Microsoft and Scott Culp for
the Acnowledgments.
This is the full story:
