>From: owner-openssl-users On Behalf Of Kiran G
>Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 00:13
>This is the openssl client output from my desktop:
>$ openssl s_client -connect 192.168.3.152:443 -debug
>CONNECTED(0003)
>write [v3format ClientHello with record and max ver 0300
and no extensions]
W
This is the openssl client output from my desktop:
$ openssl s_client -connect 192.168.3.152:443 -debug
CONNECTED(0003)
write to 0x8518108 [0x8522373] (139 bytes => 139 (0x8B))
- 16 03 00 00 86 01 00 00-82 03 00 52 70 85 71 16 ...Rp.q.
0010 - 49 b7 70 da 0b 4c b0 72-c1 a
That's very weird. alert 51 = decrypt_error received by the servers - in the
lighttpd log
or s_server output - is certainly consistent with Firefox thinking a
signature is bad.
And the signature on the cert in your capture looks right (although it
doesn't have
either subject.CN or SAN identify
On 5/1/2013 6:46 PM, Salz, Rich wrote:
It should not be surprising that both keypairs worked. Unless you’re
doing mutual authentication, the SSL server will never see the client
certificate, and so it will not be able to see the keyUsage attribute,
or the extendedKeyUsage attribute. Those two at
It should not be surprising that both keypairs worked. Unless you're doing
mutual authentication, the SSL server will never see the client certificate,
and so it will not be able to see the keyUsage attribute, or the
extendedKeyUsage attribute. Those two attributes specify how a keypair is
"su
2013/5/1 Rajeswari K
> Hello openssl-users,
>
> We have two different keypairs such as signature keypair and encryption
> keypair on our device. Hence, two different certificates (signature and
> encryption) were issued by CA server.
>
> Query :
> To perform openssl handshake, which key do we nee
It's not clear if you're talking about the private or public part of the key.
If you're talking about the private part, that's because only a
negligible number of private keys for that curve need 233 bits to be
stored. This is due to the fact that the large, prime-order subgroup
has the form 2^{23
dhoward wrote on Wednesday, May 11, 2011 20:01:
> I was recently playing around with OpenSSL's EC_KEY interface, specifically
> generating and examining keys generated using the curve sect233r1, when I
> decided to print the raw key out, in hex form. A quick analysis showed me
> that the key was s
Yup, you're right: encrypted home directory.
On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Magosányi Árpád wrote:
> I don't believe it is an openssl bug.
> You may have configured your home directory to be automounted on login (for
> example encrypted home directory with your password opening the encryption
>
??
> From: owner-openssl-us...@openssl.org On Behalf Of baccali
> Sent: Saturday, 03 July, 2010 12:06
> Hi all, sorry for my bad english i'm don't speak very well.
>
> I subscribed here because i have a probably easy question for
> you. All is in
> the title. The fact is the notion of keyUsage i
Hi Peter:
On October 26, 2009 10:37:54 pm Peter Lin wrote:
> Thanks all guys for your opinion.
>
> There is a HSM used which vendor provides hardware RSA encryption and
> decryption. However, the key of to the hardware is one way-- I can only
> pass in the key to the hardware, but cant pass out. D
Thanks all guys for your opinion.
There is a HSM used which vendor provides hardware RSA encryption and
decryption. However, the key of to the hardware is one way-- I can only pass
in the key to the hardware, but cant pass out. Due to the low performance of
the hardware decryption, I decide to use
Peter Lin wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I have a problem about key security.
>
> If a RSA private key is encrypted by an AES key, which is again encrypted by
> the same RSA private key itself, is this considered as a secure procedure?
> Obtaining the encrypted RSA private key and the AES key, is there a
Peter Lin wrote:
> The reason for this strange design is that, the plain text RSA
> private key is stored in some hardware chip which can only do
> en/decryption but cannot pass the key out. However, I need to
> save a copy of the private key in a unsafe place for other
> purpose, but need to mak
By encrypting using RSA private key, you have gained nothing - because
anyone can decrypt using the corresponding Public Key. If you encrypt using
the Public Key, how would you decrypt? You have a chicken-egg problem.
Not sure if encrypting using AES key (only) is considered secure enough but
Thank you ,
I was thinking about the possiblities of Man in the Middle Attack,
hence i asked the question " can we have one public key and two private
keys". So if the CA's private key is compromised then it can lead to
Man in the Middle Attack and any other scenario as far a TLS is concern
On Tue May 19 2009, naveen.bn wrote:
> Hi ALL,
> I have a question ? can we have one public key and two private keys.
>
It is not a built-in feature. Which I think is your question.
Note that *in general* the terms "public key" and "private key" are
just labels. The math does not make the disti
Sascha Kiefer wrote:
Is this a point of weakness? How do you feel about it? Let's discuss.
Yes, trusted CAs are the points of weakness. Because in real life all
trusts are points of weakness in one way or another.
Cheers.
VV
___
Hello,
> How is the key and iv generated? I am using enc -aes256 with a text
based password.
>
> Is there an stand alone openssl command that will do this? I need to
find the code that
> does this step so that I can replicate it in javascript.
Look at EVP_BytesToKey() implementation.
Best reg
Renegotiation. Thats what this is for.
On 11/2/07, Darryl Miles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Maybe they can, but you wont get much response from me by being too lazy
> to start a new thread with your "Compose New Mail" function, as opposed
> to picking a historic message at random and using th
Maybe they can, but you wont get much response from me by being too lazy
to start a new thread with your "Compose New Mail" function, as opposed
to picking a historic message at random and using the "Reply To Message"
function.
Have a nice day!
The Posting Police
Paul Simon wrote:
I have
> I am hoping that someone can clear this up for me.
>
> The tls1_PRF() function uses both the md5 and sha1 algorithms to generate
> pseudo-random data. Since this function is used for TLS key
> derivation, is
> the md5 algorithm allowed for key derivation while operating in FIPS mode?
The MD5 i
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007, David Schwartz wrote:
>
> > What is the *.dat format? How does it differ from pem and der formats?
> > How do we generate one with OpenSSL?
>
> I would suggest reading the server's documentation and seeing what format it
> wants its key in. Alternatively, you could try vari
> I have a SSL server application in which the certificate file is rsa.der
> and key file rsakey.dat.
There is no standard key file format that uses a '.dat' extension that I
know of.
> What is the *.dat format? How does it differ from pem and der formats?
> How do we generate one with OpenSSL?
Hi,
The certificate was purchased.I am trying to import OpenSSL certificates
into the server application which runs on vxworks OS. Is there a specific
way to generate a dat format key file or just renaming a pem or der key file
to *.dat would help?
Thanks and Regards,
Prabhu
On 3/29/07, Gayath
its probably a shown as a data file coz its encrypted..how did you
generate the cert? U should be using a PKCS12 format for importing that
stuff into the browser/server..btw are you telling it from windows's
perspective?
>Hi,
>I have a SSL server application in which the certificate file is rsa.d
Yes, giving an absolute path to SSL_use_certificate_file will work. If you are
on windows, then you should escape the \ which will be present in the path -
thats all.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bu Bacoo
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 3
Hello !
The following works for me (it's hardcoded however!).
#define certificate_file "/root/security/server.crt"
if((SSL_use_certificate_file(m_ssl,certificate_file,1))!=1) //FG: Define
SSL certificate to use
{
cout << "SSL certificate file error - did not open" << endl;
}
else
{
co
On May 3, 2005, at 2:12 PM, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
The a0/e0 is a hex representation of the bits above. If you remove the
non
repidiation usage from openssl.cnf the two should then be identical.
Steve, you're right! It worked.
Thanks,
Andrea
On Tue, May 03, 2005, Andrea Cogliati wrote:
>
> On May 3, 2005, at 1:12 PM, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
>
> >>If I use Windows Certificate viewer, the certificate generated with
> >>OpenSSL has Key Encipherment (e0) as a Key Usage, while a certificate
> >>generated through MS Certificate Server h
On May 3, 2005, at 1:12 PM, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
If I use Windows Certificate viewer, the certificate generated with
OpenSSL has Key Encipherment (e0) as a Key Usage, while a certificate
generated through MS Certificate Server has Key Encipherment (a0).
What do you get in the keyUsage extensio
On Tue, May 03, 2005, Andrea Cogliati wrote:
> Guys,
>
> I've succesfully generated a Domain Controller certificate for Smart
> Card logon in Windows with 0.9.8-dev. Now, I've found a little
> discrepancy and I cannot find any clear (to me!) documentation about
> it.
>
> If I use Windows Cert
It turns out what I needed was EVP_SealInit, so I don't need to
generate my own key. Thanks for the responses though.
Mike
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:32:03 -0800, Michael D'Errico
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
mike-mlm> I read somewhere
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:32:03 -0800, Michael
D'Errico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
mike-mlm> I read somewhere that it is a good idea to
mike-mlm> cryptographically hash your key material to
mike-mlm> generate a key, so I wrote a function to do
mike-mlm> that. I'm not e
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005, Michael D'Errico wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I read somewhere that it is a good idea to
> cryptographically hash your key material to
> generate a key, so I wrote a function to do
> that. I'm not exactly sure I'm doing what
> they suggest, so if anyone cares to, can
> you check over m
I read somewhere that it is a good idea to
cryptographically hash your key material to
generate a key, so I wrote a function to do
that.
it's an even better idea to use well known/tested
algorithm for key generation
I haven't run across any; can you point me in
the right direction? Or do you thin
Michael D'Errico wrote:
Hi,
I read somewhere that it is a good idea to
cryptographically hash your key material to
generate a key, so I wrote a function to do
that.
it's an even better idea to use well known/tested
algorithm for key generation
I'm not exactly sure I'm doing what
they suggest, so i
On Fri, Feb 11, 2005, Janin-Magnificat Thomas wrote:
> Thanks for your answer,
>
> Can SLLeavy format be encoded in DER and PEM form ?
>
Yes. The only difference between unencrypted PEM and DER is that unencrypted
PEM is the DER form base64 encoded with start and end lines.
Steve.
--
Dr Stephe
Thanks for your answer,
Can SLLeavy format be encoded in DER and PEM form ?
-Message d'origine-
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] la part de Dr. Stephen Henson
Envoyé : vendredi 11 février 2005 14:44
À : openssl-users@openssl.org
Objet : Re: key format
On Fri, F
On Fri, Feb 11, 2005, Janin-Magnificat Thomas wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm trying to create a little program that can load certificates and keys
> in a database with openssl api. But I'm not clear with keys files format.
> Correct me if I'm wrong :
>
> - PKCS#8 format is an encrypted format that co
On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 01:48:42AM +0100, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
> There are a couple of ways to do this. One is to write a short program to read
> in each component, populate an RSA structure with them using BN_hex2bn() and
> write the result out with PEM_write_RSAPrivateKey().
Hmmm, how did I
On Mon, Nov 08, 2004, Sundar Raman wrote:
> This is probably a pretty basic question, but i'm new to encryption and
> openssl, so please forgive the fact that it's probably stupid.
>
> I've got known private and public rsa keys in hex format, including all
> the parameters (n, p, q, etc.). I know
On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 04:27:14PM -0600, Sundar Raman wrote:
> I've got known private and public rsa keys in hex format, including all
> the parameters (n, p, q, etc.). I know that i can use genrsa to generate
> keys into a .pem file that can subsequently be passed to enc to
> encrypted some data.
You are seriously lost. Private keys and public keys (certificates) are
USED in performing RSA encryption, but they are not themselves encoded
and/or transmitted under RSA encryption. Yes, keys for private-key
encryption are sent under public key encryption, but
a key for private key encryption i
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bernhard Froehlich wrote:
one silly question: if I generate a request with
openssl req -new -keyout mykey.pem -out myreq.pem 265
the private key in mykey.pem is encrypted or not?
Since my openssl asks me for a password when using "openssl req -new -keyout mykey.pe
Bernhard Froehlich wrote:
>> one silly question: if I generate a request with
>> openssl req -new -keyout mykey.pem -out myreq.pem 265
>> the private key in mykey.pem is encrypted or not?
>>
> Since my openssl asks me for a password when using "openssl req -new -keyout
> mykey.pem -out myreq.pem"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
one silly question: if I generate a request with
openssl req -new -keyout mykey.pem -out myreq.pem 265
the private key in mykey.pem is encrypted or not?
Since my openssl asks me for a password when using "openssl req -new
-keyout mykey.pem -out myreq.pem", I'd think
Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
>On Thu, Sep 09, 2004, Steve Hay wrote:
>
>
>>I'm afraid I don't know what "password based encryption" is, so I don't
>>know if this is the right thing to even be trying to do. It doesn't
>>sound like what I wanted...
>>
>>
>>
>
>It one of various standards which
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004, Charles B Cranston wrote:
> Perhaps one way to think of the IV is that it is part of the key.
> That is, the IV and key are used to encrypt, and then the (same) IV
> and the (same) key can decrypt. It's just that if the IV is sent
> in clear text ("included in the structure.
Charles B Cranston wrote:
>Perhaps one way to think of the IV is that it is part of the key.
>That is, the IV and key are used to encrypt, and then the (same) IV
>and the (same) key can decrypt.
>
IOW I could hard-code the IV into my source code, or use one supplied by
the user at build time (a
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004, Steve Hay wrote:
> Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
>
> >On Thu, Sep 09, 2004, Steve Hay wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>I've no idea what the ASN1_TYPE *param is, or where to get one from. I
> >>had a look at EVP_CIPHER_param_to_asn1(), but it says that the cipher IV
> >>in the ctx pa
Perhaps one way to think of the IV is that it is part of the key.
That is, the IV and key are used to encrypt, and then the (same) IV
and the (same) key can decrypt. It's just that if the IV is sent
in clear text ("included in the structure...") then it is not secret.
One popular algorithm is to u
Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
>On Thu, Sep 09, 2004, Steve Hay wrote:
>
>
>
>>I've no idea what the ASN1_TYPE *param is, or where to get one from. I
>>had a look at EVP_CIPHER_param_to_asn1(), but it says that the cipher IV
>>in the ctx passed to it must be set when the call is made, which seems
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004, Steve Hay wrote:
> Steve Hay wrote:
>
> It occurs to me that I can make use of PKCS5_v2_PBE_keyivgen() for
> 0.9.4+, and just use EVP_BytesToKey() for earlier versions -- the fact
> that the latter doesn't support non-default key lengths isn't a problem
> because I can't
Steve Hay wrote:
>El hallabi-Kettani Abderrahmane wrote:
>
>
>
>>the function PKCS5_v2_PBE_keyivgen() exist in version
>>openssl0.7.9d in directory
>>openssl/crypto/evp/p5_crypt.c
>>it corresponds to what you want to do .
>>
>>
>>
>If you'd read my mail properly, you'd see that I'd already f
Davy Durham wrote:
I'm really naive about encryption if you couldn't tell already.
Where are some online resources that explain in plain terms what SSL
uses (i.e. RSA, DSA, IDEA, RC4,.. ) I ready the informative 2
documents already:
http://www.openssl.org/docs/HOWTO/keys.txt and
http://www.o
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004, Claus Nagel wrote:
> > It follows the RFC3280 recommendation in 4.2.1.2 (1):
> >
> > The keyIdentifier is composed of the 160-bit SHA-1 hash of the
> > value of the BIT STRING subjectPublicKey (excluding the tag,
> > length, and number of unuse
> It follows the RFC3280 recommendation in 4.2.1.2 (1):
>
> The keyIdentifier is composed of the 160-bit SHA-1 hash of the
>value of the BIT STRING subjectPublicKey (excluding the tag,
>length, and number of unused bits).
thanks. sorry, i missed that point whi
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004, Claus Nagel wrote:
> > The SKID can be calculated automatically by the extension code (see
> > doc/openssl.txt). The AKID is normally copied from the SKID of the issuers
> > certificate.
>
> As for the SKID I found the following in the openssl.txt:
> Example: subjectKeyIdent
> The SKID can be calculated automatically by the extension code (see
> doc/openssl.txt). The AKID is normally copied from the SKID of the issuers
> certificate.
As for the SKID I found the following in the openssl.txt:
Example: subjectKeyIdentifier=hash
But which values are taken to calculate tha
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004, Claus Nagel wrote:
> hello,
> how do i compute the values for X509v3 Subject Key Identifier and X509v3
> Authority Key Identifier{keyid} in a X509v3 certificate? And where can I store
> MD5 or SHA1 thumbprints in a X509v3 certificate?
> thx,
The SKID can be calculated automa
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004, Tim Tassonis wrote:
> Hi
>
> I've got to find out the keysize used in an S/MIME encrypted mail.
>
> I looked around in the openssl code and tried the following:
>
>
> X509_ALGOR *alg;
> PKCS7 *p7;
> int p7_type;
> BIO *mail_bio *indata;
> ...
> p7 = SMIME_read_PKCS7(mail_
On Thu, Feb 26, 2004, Mike Gagnon wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> I need to know how to calculate the fingerprint for public/private RSA/DSA keys. (4
> possibilities).
>
> Right now, for both public and private keys, I get the same fingerprint (which I
> think is wrong). I
> think I'm missing some fiel
Hi Dr. Henson,
Thanks for your reply, I don't want the same fingerprint for private keys - that's
where my problem
is coming from. I have an interface that shows both public and private keys - and
they're
enumerated by fingerprint. The uniqueness of the fingerprint guarantees a different
key
Ng,
Thank for your reply. From you it's a honor! ;o)
Yes I know, my question wasn't clear as my knowledge about SSL. Honestly, I
didn't know what was the good question! Anyway, the answer was in ZSmime FAQ,
the only one I hadn't read.
Thanks for your time to reply to this message and even mor
c Rescorla [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 26 April 2002 16:17
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Key strength confusion
[snip]
As far as I know, there is in fact no such thing as a 40-bit cert.
There are two kinds of certificates:
(1) Ordinary X.509 certs containing an RSA key of whatever strength
"Luo, Feng (Exchange)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You are absolutely right, there is not so called 40-bit certificate. The key
> strength is controlled by server and browser, forget about SGC , it's old.
You can't forget about SGC, because there are still SGC-only export
browsers out there.
-E
ECTED]
Subject: Re: Key strength confusion
Stuart Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Friday, April 26, 2002, at 11:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean when you say that you paid for a 40bit
> > certificate. Do you mean an SGC c
Stuart Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Friday, April 26, 2002, at 11:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean when you say that you paid for a 40bit
> > certificate. Do you mean an SGC cert?
> >
>
> No. We purchased through a local Verisign distributor which
I don't know much about the restrictions in Australia, but I do know that
we've had a 128bit certificate since 1997. At that time we were running
apache-ssl. So I confess that I've never touched a 40bit certificate.
There are issues with versions of IE5 before 5.01SP2 (which itself is being
dropp
On Friday, April 26, 2002, at 11:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I'm not sure what you mean when you say that you paid for a 40bit
> certificate. Do you mean an SGC cert?
>
No. We purchased through a local Verisign distributor which sells Global
(128-bit SSL) and Secure (40-bit SSL) certi
Hi,
Please check if you are using the RC4/RC2 cipher suite. In that case,
"Note that for RC4 and RC2 ciphers, the phrase "40-bit encryption" means the
keys are still 128 bits long,
but only 40 bits have cryptographic significance. "
Regards,
Srikanth
Stuart Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 2
The path in httpd.conf may not be right. Maybe you can double check the
DocumentRoot directive? Not sure if you also have patched apache with
mod_ssl package?
--
WWW.XGFORCE.COM -
The Next Generation Server Clustering
and Clustered Enterprise Firewal
Pradeep,
You are a troublemaker ;)
Microsoft's CryptoAPI CSP architecture requires RSA primes to be a
multiple of 8 bits in length, which in turn forces moduli to be a multiple
of 16 bits in length. Since IE uses one of the MS CSP's, I would assume only
moduli which are a multiple of 16
Hello all,
Greg, I guess 384 is too small...I tried with
400..even that gave problems...with 500,512,1000,1024
there were no problems..
Does anyone know what would be a safe lower-limit?
TIA,
Pradeep
--- Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 384 bits is too small to be secure, and too small
384 bits is too small to be secure, and too small to hold the encrypted
pre-master secret + PKCS#1 padding. The browser should really refuse to make
such a connection anyway. I wouldn't be surprised if you just bumbled onto a
bug in Netscape.
use 1024-bit or larger moduli.
__
Thanks for help,
It worked, I have now a certificate with a 1024bits key.
Now I need to make sure all users will have an appropriate windows version (with
the good CSP).
Regards
Maxime.
> Maxine,
>
> See if the following snippet works.
> ...
>
> codebase="xenroll.dll"
> id=Enroll
"Tridib, Mumbai" wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> Please help me. My problems are as follows:
>
> 1. I have generated key pair in Netscape (at client side) and then subsequently I
>have created Certificate (at server side) using -SPKAC option of "ca" command i.e
>signing the request with root private key.
> Are there any good online references for effectively using OpenSSL to
> negotiate a key exchange, then set up a random session key?
There's nothing special you need to do. That's what SSL is for and that's
what OpenSSL does best.
DS
___
Frank Balluffi wrote:
>
> I am confused about how to check a key usage extension. I see that ca_check
> "calls" ku_reject, which uses the X509 ex_flags element.
>
> Is it necessary to use the ku_reject method or is it possible to call
> d2i_ASN1_BIT_STRING (to decode the KeyUsage BIT STRING) and
> I think from doing some searching on the net that my private
> key and my certificate don't match. What do I need to do to
> make them match?
Replace the key file that Apache generated with the one from which you
created the certificate request that you sent to the CA to get the
certificate.
Jorge Olmos wrote:
> My question is: is key size relevant to the encription rate?
No.
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Autom
Actually, they can be worth a fair bit; it depends on the circumstances.
Take the following scenario:
1) Bank wants to authenticate its users via certs, but doesn't want
to become a certificate issuer.
2) Bank trusts N certificate providers that do nothing but guarantee
that the
Fedor Utenkov wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I have a theoretic question.
> What is the best way to store CA private key ? Put in the file on
> the comp, running the web server and facing the internet seems to me
> not very secure. But from the another point of view I'd like to
> au
>What's the value of an automated signing procedure?
It depends greatly on where the automation is.
For example, if the input to the automated process is, say, a magtape from
the Personnel Office...
__
OpenSSL Project
What's the value of an automated signing procedure? If you're signing certs
in an automated fashion, how much are they really worth (ie. what
'certification' has really happened)?
At 04:12 PM 4/21/2000 +0400, you wrote:
>Hello all,
>
> I have a theoretic question.
> What is the best way
Yang Dehua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> i downloaded and compiled OpenSSL 0.9.5, then i
> got the following error before i tried to upgrade
> my Apache1.3.12 with mod_ssl 2.6.0:
> "Failed to generate temporary 512 bits RSA private key"
Use the latest mod_ssl release.
__
You are on the wrong list, you wanted to got to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The question is answered:
http://www.modssl.org/docs/2.4/ssl_faq.html#ToC28
Why they differ is a question I can'T abnswer. Best thing
is try again from scratch following what step-by-step guide.
Charles Ritter schrieb:
>
> I'm
88 matches
Mail list logo
