Re: [06/10] wintrust: Implement CryptCATOpen and CryptCATClose.

2008-12-23 Thread Maarten Lankhorst 
Hi Juan and Hans,

Juan Lang schreef:
 Hi Hans,

   
 Maarten, do you remember what the code to store attribute certs was
 needed for? I'd like to address Juan's concern by either adding a test
 or taking the code out.
 

 I wouldn't worry about it.  The code looks correct to the eye, it's
 just calling part of crypt32 that's stubbed out (and on my list.)
 Mainly I was curious if you'd managed to test with native crypt32
 somehow, as that's something I've never managed to make work (on
 Linux.)
   
I was working on some code that needed it, The specific functions were 
stubbed out (crossover proprietary advantage (TM)) so it's not used, but 
the correct implementation of CryptCATGetCertAttr/CryptCATEnumCertAttr 
would need the attributes.

Cheers,
Maarten.

Re: [06/10] wintrust: Implement CryptCATOpen and CryptCATClose.

2008-12-22 Thread Juan Lang 
Hi Hans, this is a really minor comment:

+struct cryptcat
+{
+DWORD magic;
+HANDLEmsg;

msg's type should be HCRYPTMSG instead.

+for (i = 0; i  cc-attr_count; i++)
+{
+if (!CryptMsgGetParam(hmsg, CMSG_ATTR_CERT_PARAM, i, NULL, size))

Out of curiosity, how did you test this?
--Juan

Re: [06/10] wintrust: Implement CryptCATOpen and CryptCATClose.

2008-12-22 Thread Hans Leidekker 
On Monday 22 December 2008 16:59:29 Juan Lang wrote:

 +struct cryptcat
 +{
 +DWORD magic;
 +HANDLEmsg;
 
 msg's type should be HCRYPTMSG instead.

Thanks for catching that.

 +for (i = 0; i  cc-attr_count; i++)
 +{
 +if (!CryptMsgGetParam(hmsg, CMSG_ATTR_CERT_PARAM, i, NULL, 
 size))
 
 Out of curiosity, how did you test this?

That would be a question for Maarten since he mostly wrote this code.

 -Hans

Re: [06/10] wintrust: Implement CryptCATOpen and CryptCATClose.

2008-12-22 Thread Juan Lang 
 Out of curiosity, how did you test this?

 That would be a question for Maarten since he mostly wrote this code.

Well, last he asked me about it, I hadn't had a chance to look at
attribute certs in messages yet (they're stubbed out.)  That's why I
was curious ;-)
--Juan