Looking at the implementation of CMS_get0_signers(), it looks like it creates a new stack of X509 that I will have to free.
Isn't the convention to use a "1" if the return values needs to be freed, and "0" if not? So shouldn't this function be named CMS_get1_signers()? (Note that CMS_get1_crls() is correctly named with a "1".) Probably too late to change it now though, huh? Phillip
