I'm trying to sign and then verify using openssl RSA
but I'm when I'm verifying I'm getting the error
message:
RSA operation error
1902:error:0406706C:rsa
routines:RSA_EAY_PUBLIC_ENCRYPT:data greater than mod
len:rsa_eay.c:364:erro
I generated the private key using the command "openssl
genrsa
This is a forwarded message
From: Pavel Tsekov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thursday, April 11, 2002, 12:39:59 PM
Subject: [BUG & suggested PATCH] EVP_DecodeUpdate 0.9.6b & 0.9.6c
Any comments on this ? I posted on openssl-users but got no response
at all - either confirming on
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 09:59:58AM +0200, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
> This is a forwarded message
> From: Pavel Tsekov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Thursday, April 11, 2002, 12:39:59 PM
> Subject: [BUG & suggested PATCH] EVP_DecodeUpdate 0.9.6b & 0.9.6c
>
> Any comments on this ?
Hello Lutz,
Friday, April 12, 2002, 10:12:04 AM, you wrote:
>> Any comments on this ? I posted on openssl-users but got no response
>> at all - either confirming on denying...
LJ> Your posting is still in my incoming queue.
LJ> Obviously my team mates normally dealing with EVP issues are curren
Hi,
I read RFC 1700 and I don't see why we should get problem if we rename
"internet 7" in crypto/objects/objects.txt from "mail" to
"internetMail". Nobody should ever use a direct reference to these
#defines. Only objects.txt would use this name and if the first user
need a subtree then we simpl
> You do not point out in which version the problem occurs.
> Does it still occur with recent snapshots?
sorry. my mistake. i'm still using 0.9.6b, but i checked cvs and all the
bad bits are still there.
arne
__
OpenSSL Pro
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 01:59:17AM +0300, Arne Ansper wrote:
[Detailed analysis about problems with state machine/non-blocking sockets
when using implicit handshake deleted]
Probably Bodo has more in-depth knowledge about this than myself, but
let't start discussing it anyway :-)
You do not poin
Alex Pankratov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> the following problem is present in 0.9.6 and 0.9.6c.
>
> It is possible to put server code into the internal infinite
> loop in ssl3_read_bytes() by sending the following data from
> the client right after establishing TCP connection:
>
> 01 03 01 00 01 00
Arne Ansper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[...]
> okey, the bug:
>
> ssl3_read_internal function has special treatment for situations when
> renegotiation is going on and the handshake and data packets are arriving
> in random order.
>
> now, if i have a non-blocking socket on server side and i use BIO
On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Lutz Jaenicke wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 01:53:11AM -0700, Dax Kelson wrote:
> >
> > sshd/ftpd/telnetd -> pam_ldap -> libldap -> libssl/libcrypto
> >
> > To recap, when my dual processor Pentium III is idle, I *always* get a
> > return value of 0 from SSL_connect. If
If I run "strace -f -p 'PID of getty', and then login, it works (as I
described before). Here is the (much longer) ssldump output.
10.1.0.57 is the client, 10.1.0.3 is the server
# ssldump -n host 10.1.0.57 and port 389
New TCP connection #1: 10.1.0.57(33051) <-> 10.1.0.3(389)
1 1 0.0107 (0
Hi Dax,
I don't know if I can help much here except to cast a second pair of eyes
over this - but as you seem to be running short of places to look ...
On Saturday 13 April 2002 12:51, Dax Kelson wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Lutz Jaenicke wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 01:53:11AM -0700, Dax
> > I took a closer look at this second TCP session with tethereal.
> >
> > Here is it:
> >
> > 10.1.0.57 is the client, 10.1.0.3 is the server
> >
> > 41 6.48884610.1.0.57 -> 10.1.0.3 TCP 33041 > 389 [SYN]
> > Seq=2664529133 Ack=0 Win=5840 Len=0 42 6.489711 10.1.0.3 -> 10.1.0.57
Hi there,
> > yet your tethereal output is interlaced with some LDAP
> > debugging messages, one is the server sending a "Bad message type"
> > message to the client and the client sending a "LDAP Invalid LDAP packet"
> > message back to the server?? How is it possible that LDAP messages are
> >
On Fri, 2002-04-12 at 22:30, Geoff Thorpe wrote:
>
> Can you get any log messages from the server as to "errors" it is reporting
> at the time these connections are being dumped that are *not* reported when
> the connections are going OK? It could be a race condition above the LDAP
> layer, or
15 matches
Mail list logo
