Roger Boden wrote:
What information is there regarding the patent situation for eliptic
curve crypto and MQV? The RSA FAQ claims that there are three patents
regarding implementations optimizations of eliptic curve crypto and that
Certicom has a patent pending regarding MQV. Is there any additio
Johnny,
>>In the parallel thread with the OpenSSL developers, I have been asked
>>whether "NetBSD can donate the netbsd-sparc64 target (patches)" for
>>inclusion in the upstream sources. I think this might be a good time
>>now, as everything works...
Well, that's not exactly what I actually me
Problem has been addressed in December. Please note that SUPPORT section
in README is specific about testing current snapshot to see if the
problem has already been addressed prior filing a bug report:-) I'm
dismissing this case and thanking you for your report.
__
As per http://cvs.openssl.org/chngview?cn=12824 the case is dismissed.
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated Lis
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Are you on openssl-dev list? I wonder because it appears [at least to
me] to be good idea to have OS/distribution vendors at least minimally
represented at openssl-dev list...
> tried to build openssl on a big endian arm box and ... well needless to say
> it
> didnt
Hello All,
Thank you all for your response. I am not able to download postfix-2.2-20040829-vanilla from the website http://www.aet.tu-cottbus.de/personen/jaenicke/postfix_tls/. Is there any other location from where I can dowload this source. I want to see how BIO_PAIR is used in pfixtls.c.
Tha
> currently the parisc detection fails in a few ways:
> - doesnt detect 64bit parisc kernels (`uname -m` returns 'parisc64')
> - /proc/cpuinfo parsing blows up on SMP kernels
> - shared library support works fine
>
> find attached a small patch (against cvs, not 0.9.7e release) which fixed all
On Thursday 20 January 2005 04:42, Nils Larsch wrote:
> Roger Boden wrote:
> > What information is there regarding the patent situation for eliptic
> > curve crypto and MQV?
--
>
> ask certicom or have a look at the uspto.gov patent database
Looking at uspto.gov will do you no good unless the pate
On 2005.01.19 at 22:50:25 +, Ben Laurie wrote:
> Victor B. Wagner wrote:
> >On 2005.01.19 at 15:26:25 +0100, Nils Larsch wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Roger Boden wrote:
> >>
> >>>Hello,
> >It should be obvois next step when we get this infrastructure working.
>
> Why would we want to assist patent hold
Thank you all, I am all set.
- Prashant.Prashant Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello All,
Thank you all for your response. I am not able to download postfix-2.2-20040829-vanilla from the website http://www.aet.tu-cottbus.de/personen/jaenicke/postfix_tls/. Is there any other location from w
On Thursday 20 January 2005 10:21 am, Andy Polyakov via RT wrote:
> Just to double-check. Does parisc64 linux support 32-bit API? Is
> following statement true: even though parisc64 is recognized generated
> code is 32-bit one? Is following statement true: apparently there is no
> interest for 64-
On Thursday 20 January 2005 10:15 am, Andy Polyakov via RT wrote:
> Are you on openssl-dev list? I wonder because it appears [at least to
> me] to be good idea to have OS/distribution vendors at least minimally
> represented at openssl-dev list...
yes, and i e-mailed out this patch twice (with li
>>Are you on openssl-dev list? I wonder because it appears [at least to
>>me] to be good idea to have OS/distribution vendors at least minimally
>>represented at openssl-dev list...
>
> yes,
Stange, I don't see a single gentoo.org address in the list file...
> and i e-mailed out this patch twic
As per http://cvs.openssl.org/chngview?cn=12840 the case is mismissed.
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated Lis
Got a question: It seems that OpenSSL allows the cert chain to be any
number of certificates which it then treats as a pool to build the cert
chain from whereas RFC 2246 says the certificate chains must be ordered
and no redundant certs are allowed (+/- CA cert):
"The sender's certificate must co
On Thursday 20 January 2005 13:03, Samuel Meder wrote:
> Got a question: It seems that OpenSSL allows the cert chain to be any
> number of certificates which it then treats as a pool to build the cert
> chain from whereas RFC 2246 says the certificate chains must be ordered
> and no redundant certs
On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 01:17:29PM -0500, Jim Schneider wrote:
> On Thursday 20 January 2005 13:03, Samuel Meder wrote:
> > Got a question: It seems that OpenSSL allows the cert chain to be any
> > number of certificates which it then treats as a pool to build the cert
> > chain from whereas RFC 22
On Thu, 2005-01-20 at 11:24 -0700, Jack Lloyd wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 01:17:29PM -0500, Jim Schneider wrote:
> > On Thursday 20 January 2005 13:03, Samuel Meder wrote:
> > > Got a question: It seems that OpenSSL allows the cert chain to be any
> > > number of certificates which it then tre
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 20 Jan 2005 12:03:13 -0600, Samuel Meder
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
meder> Got a question: It seems that OpenSSL allows the cert chain to
meder> be any number of certificates which it then treats as a pool to
meder> build the cert chain from whereas RFC 2246
On Thu, 2005-01-20 at 20:39 +0100, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 20 Jan 2005 12:03:13 -0600, Samuel
> Meder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> meder> Got a question: It seems that OpenSSL allows the cert chain to
> meder> be any number of certificates wh
On Thu, 2005-01-20 at 15:16 -0500, Rich Salz wrote:
> > My point is that OpenSSL does work even if the list of certificates does
> > not comply to to RFC2246 ... which seems bad to me
>
> What's bad about it? I suppose there's a DoS risk if you have to look
> through a big cert list to build a
On Thursday 20 January 2005 15:27, Samuel Meder wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-01-20 at 15:16 -0500, Rich Salz wrote:
> > > My point is that OpenSSL does work even if the list of certificates
> > > does not comply to to RFC2246 ... which seems bad to me
--
> If you feel that tightening up is not worth th
Jim Schneider wrote:
...
Looking at uspto.gov will do you no good unless the patent has been issued -
pending applications are not public record.
from yet another crypto patent application:
...
The MQV (Menezes, Qu, Vanstone) protocol provides a method of sharing a
key between two users of a publ
23 matches
Mail list logo
