> From: owner-openssl-us...@openssl.org On Behalf Of Harald Latzko
> Sent: Friday, 03 August, 2012 03:02
> Am 03.08.2012 um 03:55 schrieb Dave Thompson:
> Yes, the hash link (.0) exists and after the first
> connect failed, I double-checked the linked openSSL version
> against the commandline t
Hello Jakob,
Am 03.08.2012 um 09:52 schrieb Jakob Bohm:
>> My assumption of a chain of trust is that the end of a trust chain is
>> reached (=a server or client certificate is seen as valid and secure) if the
>> whole chain of certificates ends in an entifiy where subject=issuer and
>> CA:true
On 8/3/2012 9:02 AM, Harald Latzko wrote:
Hello Dave,
Am 03.08.2012 um 03:55 schrieb Dave Thompson:
> Aside: it's a good thing you gave the server, because Outlook
> (which we use) blocks *.cer. I wish it didn't, but it does.
I've reached this "great" functionality last week, too. There's a
po
Hello Dave,
Am 03.08.2012 um 03:55 schrieb Dave Thompson:
> Aside: it's a good thing you gave the server, because Outlook
> (which we use) blocks *.cer. I wish it didn't, but it does.
I've reached this "great" functionality last week, too. There's a possibility
to allow filename extensions ins
>From: owner-openssl-us...@openssl.org On Behalf Of Harald Latzko
>Sent: Thursday, 02 August, 2012 03:03
> self-signed certificate as attached to this mail (can be retrieved
>from the TLS server 87.236.105.37:6619). My TLS client uses the
>following options:
>SSL_CTX_load_verify_locations(ctx, N
Hell,I've got a question regarding self-signed X509v3 certificates used in a TLS1.0 server/client environment. A communication partner uses a self-signed certificate as attached to this mail (can be retrieved from the TLS server 87.236.105.37:6619). My TLS client uses the following options: SSL_CTX
