RE: Crash in BIO_set_fp(): Windows esp SL VC9?

-dev added, I think this is actually a bug > From: owner-openssl-us...@openssl.org On Behalf Of Michael Boman > Sent: Monday, 01 March, 2010 11:40 > I am using OpenSSL 0.9.8l from http://www.slproweb.com/products/Win32OpenSSL.html > I link to these libraries for

Re: [openssl.org #2162] Updated CMAC, CCM, GCM code

>> As already mentioned programming SSEn+1 is not self-goal, all-round >> performance is. The only thing that can make me consider SSE2 at this >> point is performance numbers from Core2, which would be not worse than >> say 16 cycles per byte, preferably with 256B table. So could you >> *please* f

Re: [openssl-dev] [openssl.org #1951] [patch] verification of X.509 certificates that contain an RSASSA-PSS signature

Hodie VII Id. Mar. MMX, Dr. Stephen Henson scripsit: > On Tue, Mar 09, 2010, Erwann ABALEA wrote: > > > I can't verify ecdsa-with-SHA256 certificates, the ones transmitted a > > few days ago (German passports), with the same error > > (d2i_ECPKParameters function). > > > > The verification of the

sha-256 support in openssl 0.9.8g

Thanks Rafiq and Jason, I did run the "openssl dgst -sha256 " command, and it didnt complain ! So I know at least the simple sha-256 hashing operation is supported in openssl 0.9.8g. Just wasn't sure if it was also fully supported in the context of certificate verification, etc. Sounds like

Re: [openssl.org #2175] [PATCH] Optimization for 1024 bit RSA on x86_64 platform

>> The performance benchmark with "openssl speed" show about 50% >> performance gain for 1024 bit private RSA. >> >> The optimization is implemented as an engine named "RSAX". >> >> Because x86_64 assembly is used in implementation, the optimization is >> only available on x86_64. >> >> More inform