PSK usage( RFC 4279) - examples and docs
Hi All. I am looking for some docs which explain how to use PSK based SSL connection ( RFC 4279). I tried executing the example apps, but they asked for certificates. My understanding is that PSK based SSL connection does not require certificates. Am I correct ? Where can I find exmaple implemtentation ? and any relevant docs ? Thanks Mahendra
Re: [openssl.org #1504] Padding bug in 0.9.8d (Solaris 9, Sparc)
Nils Larsch via RT schrieb: > > openssl doesn't support the type of padding > (0x80, 0x00, 0x00, ...) you are using > (openssl only supports the padding described > in pkcs7). In that case, any idea why it does happen to work with version 0.9.8? Assuming that wasn't intended, it sure seems like a very strange coincidence... > Try decrypting it without padding (using the > EVP_CIPH_NO_PADDING flag) and remove the > padding yourself. OK, will do. Thanks, Stefan __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How to Submit a patch
Nitin M wrote: > Hi! > > Can anyone please tell me the correct way to submit a patch here, as I > have never done that before on this list? > As stated somewhere on the website: submit it by email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: wrt SPAM protection this interface is moderated so there may be some delay(*) before the request becomes public. (*) delay being between minutes and several hours depending on when I find the time to look into the queue of incoming requests. Best regards, Lutz __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [openssl.org #1504] Padding bug in 0.9.8d (Solaris 9, Sparc)
Stefan Neis via RT wrote: > Nils Larsch via RT schrieb: >> openssl doesn't support the type of padding > > (0x80, 0x00, 0x00, ...) you are using > > (openssl only supports the padding described > > in pkcs7). > > In that case, any idea why it does happen to > work with version 0.9.8? Assuming that wasn't > intended, it sure seems like a very strange > coincidence... actually it was a coincidence :-) If you look at the old code in crypto/evp/evp_enc.c ... n=ctx->final[b-1]; if (n > b) { EVPerr(EVP_F_EVP_DECRYPTFINAL,EVP_R_BAD_DECRYPT); return(0); } for (i=0; ifinal[--b] != n) { EVPerr(EVP_F_EVP_DECRYPTFINAL,EVP_R_BAD_DECRYPT); return(0); } } n=ctx->cipher->block_size-n; for (i=0; ifinal[i]; *outl=n; you can see that this code will always return 8 bytes (the block size) if n (== ctx->final[b-1]) is 0, regardless of how many padding bytes were actually added. > >> Try decrypting it without padding (using the > > EVP_CIPH_NO_PADDING flag) and remove the > > padding yourself. > > OK, will do. Thanks, ok, I will close this ticket. Nils __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]