OK, Thanks.
On 4/27/2016 11:31 PM, Richard Levitte wrote:
In message <5720fd7d.3050...@gmail.com> on Wed, 27 Apr 2016 12:57:17 -0500, Douglas E
Engert <deeng...@gmail.com> said:
deengert> You can call it a documentation problem. The problem only showed up
deengert> with trying to update d
deengert> in an existing rsa key. RSA_set0_key requires n, e, and d == NULL OR
deengert> n, e, and d to all be set at the same time.
Not any more, just the first time (and then only n and e, d can be
left NULL). So that makes this particular sequence perfectly legal:
RSA_set0_key(rsa, n, e, NULL);
/* calculate d */
RSA_set0_key(rsa, NULL, NULL, d);
(sloppy code, btw... return codes should really be checked)
Cheers,
Richard
--
Douglas E. Engert <deeng...@gmail.com>
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
