On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 03:06:47PM +0200, Gisle Vanem wrote:
crypto/rsa/rsa_locl.h wrongly uses 'size_t' in some arguments. It should
match the implementation in crypto/rsa/rsa_sign.c (what happened to this
file?). A patch:
--- orig/crypto/rsa/rsa_locl.h 2006-08-28 19:01:02 +0200
Hi,
I think I found an error in apps/pkcs12.c:
1 else if (!strcmp (*args, -certpbe)) {
2 if (args[1]) {
3 args++;
4 if (!strcmp(*args, NONE))
5 cert_pbe = -1;
6
hi,
over the years i always assume that it's just a few step before openssl
reach version 1.0, but now it seems to be very far in the future.
what is the roadmap for openssl?
will it be ever 1.0?
what is the reason behind this 0.x.x version number?
for an old user it's obvious that it's a stable a
Brad House wrote:
As far as I am aware, the 1.1 tarball won't be released until validation
is complete, and the 1.0 tarball has been removed because the validation
has been temporarily 'suspended'.
Correct on both counts (current deployments based on 1.0 can remain in
use). The release of
It's still a question/answer verification system -- why can't they just
submit all the questions and answers in one batch, and then submit bogus
questions and answers in another batch, and then intersperse them in the
third batch?
A check should not take forever and a freakin' day.
-Kyle H
-
