On 2008.04.04 at 15:53:33 +0200, roberto calosino wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'd like to know the difference between X509_STORE (X509_STORE_new) and
> STACK_OF(X509) (sk_X509_new).
> What kind of additional information contains a X509_STORE ?
Stack is generic data structure. There are stacks of every
On Wed, May 03, 2006, Daniel Granath wrote:
> The X509_STORE time attribute is not propagated to X509_STORE_CTX.
> If you call the X509_STORE_set_time method on a X509_STORE, the
> appropriate flag is set in the params flag attribute and the time
> attribute is also set. However, when a X509_STORE
Steffen Lips wrote:
Hi,
We have already some leaks in our application.
I found out, that for STACK_OF(X509) there are two cleanup functions.
sk_X509_free to free only the 'stackframe', and sk_509_pop_free for
freeing the whole stack.
Is there something for X509_STORE, too? X509_STORE_free see
On Tue, Apr 01, 2003, Chris Jarshant wrote:
>
> Well... do what you need to do. I'm going with the evil short-term
> hack cause the alternative is our user base sitting their twiddling
> their thumbs looking up the number of the sales guy that sold them
> crappy app that hangs for 10 minutes :-)
> Well in the short term some kind of evil hack will be needed by an
> application. This would involve messing around with the internals of the
> X509_STORE and normally you shouldn't go near those. However in this case
you
> haven't got any choice.
>
> In outline you'd create an X509_OBJECT for e
On Tue, Apr 01, 2003, Chris Jarshant wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Dr. Stephen Henson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, March 31, 2003 7:52 PM
> Subject: Re: X509_STORE and X509_verify performance
>
- Original Message -
From: "Dr. Stephen Henson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2003 7:52 PM
Subject: Re: X509_STORE and X509_verify performance
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2003, Chris Jarshant wrote:
>
> > I generated 1000 te
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003, Chris Jarshant wrote:
> I generated 1000 test self-signed CA certs, and wrote
> a small program to add them all to an X509_STORE in
> preparation for verifying a certificate.. But this operation
> took a LONG, LONG time. Even adding 500 certs took
> approx. 30 seconds! It a
And just to be clear, it was the for() loop
that
calls X509_STORE_add_cert() for each
cert that was taking forever, not the actual
verification, which took no perceivable (in
terms of user interface delay)
time.
cj
- Original Message -
From:
Chris Jarshant
To: [EMAIL
