On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 5:33 AM, Dr. Stephen Henson <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013, Phillip Hellewell wrote:
>
> > Looking at the implementation of CMS_get0_signers(), it looks like it
> > creates a new stack of X509 that I will have to free.
>
> It's midway between 1 and 0 ;-)
>
> The STACK needs to be freed buty not each individual member. So you call
> sk_X509_free and NOT sk_X509_pop_free().
>
Ah, I see. Hey, we should come up with a new prefix like "0_5" for that
(j/k).
So just to confirm:
CMS_get0_signers(): free with sk_X509_free()
CMS_get1_certs(): free with sk_X509_pop_free()
CMS_get1_crls(): free with sk_X509_CRL_pop_free()
Phillip
