On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 12:23:26PM +0200, Svenning Sorensen wrote:
> Since I wanted to use our private enterprises OIDs, I used the form:
> 
> enterprises 1527 1    : myobj         : My Object
> 
> (same form as the dcObject already in there)
> However, "enterprises" is undefined, so my object ended up at the root
> (i.e. 1527.1 instead of 1.3.6.1.4.1.1527.1) without a warning.
> 
> I hacked a bit in objects.pl to catch this gotcha:
> 
> --- openssl-SNAP-20020402/crypto/objects/objects.pl   Mon Dec  3 15:01:26 2001
> +++ openssl-SNAP-20020402-sss/crypto/objects/objects.pl       Thu Apr  4 11:12:46 
>2002
> @@ -210,6 +210,8 @@
>       if (!($a[0] =~ /^[0-9]+$/))
>               {
>               $a[0] =~ s/-/_/g;
> +             if (!defined($obj{$a[0]}))
> +                     { die "$ARGV[0]:$o:Undefined identifier ",$a[0],"\n"; }
>               $pref_oid = "OBJ_" . $a[0];
>               $pref_sep = ",";
>               shift @a;
> =============
> 
> As it turns out, both "private" and "enterprises" are undefined, so objects.txt needs
> to be fixed to make it compile at all. This patch seemed least intrusive:
> 
> -- openssl-SNAP-20020402/crypto/objects/objects.txt   Tue Mar 26 19:01:01 2002
> +++ openssl-SNAP-20020402-sss/crypto/objects/objects.txt      Thu Apr  4 10:15:27 
>2002
> @@ -699,10 +699,10 @@
>  internet 6           : snmpv2                : SNMPv2
>  internet 7           : mail                  : Mail
>  
> -private 1            : enterprises           : Enterprises
> +Private 1            : enterprises           : Enterprises
>  
>  # RFC 2247
> -enterprises 1466 344 : dcobject              : dcObject
> +Enterprises 1466 344 : dcobject              : dcObject

This makes sense to me. I have applied the patch, so it should be fixed in
the next snapshot.

> I'm also a bit suspicious about the OIDs of "secp192r1" and "secp256r1".
> In obj_dat.h they both end up having OID 0. Their corresponding OBJ_ macros
> in obj_mac.h get mapped to OBJ_X9_62_prime{192,256}v1 (of which I suppose
> they are aliases), though, so it may be OK.
> I'm not into all the gory details of this magic - it just looked a bit odd to me...

I am not sure about these ones. Bodo Moeller overviewed these changes, based
on changes submitted by Nils Larsch.
I have copied them through on this email to receive their comments.

Best regards,
        Lutz
-- 
Lutz Jaenicke                             [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.aet.TU-Cottbus.DE/personen/jaenicke/
BTU Cottbus, Allgemeine Elektrotechnik
Universitaetsplatz 3-4, D-03044 Cottbus
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager                           [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to