UDP's datagram semantics means that the application either writes an entire
datagram (if kernel socket buffer has enough space) or it needs to retry. I am
guessing that comes to play here.
- Pradosh
On Thursday, August 21, 2014 3:31 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
OpenSSL 1.1.0-dev (git maste
From: Richard Levitte
> There is some similar package for Perl, isn't there? Is that very
> much of a pain? [...]
I expect it to be one more thing which many people won't have. I
seem to have a Compaq/HP-sourced v5.8.6 ("Compiled at Mar 6 2008
06:07:12"), and newer stuff is probably avail
In message <14082111271510_20200...@antinode.info> on Thu, 21 Aug 2014 11:27:15
-0500, "Steven M. Schweda" said:
sms> From: Richard Levitte
sms>
sms> > The current build system is based on the assumption that you have a
sms> > the base VMS installation with only a C compiler added. No MMS, no
> http://antinode.info/ftp/openssl/0_9_8zb/
>
>1.0.1i was not entirely happy, either:
> [...]
> %LINK-I-UDFSYM, SSL_TEST_FUNCTIONS
> [...]
Added "ssl_utst" to the module list in ssl/ssl-lib.com:
http://antinode.info/ftp/openssl/1_0_1i/
> [...] I haven't yet tried 1.0
OpenSSL 1.1.0-dev (git master version at 2014-08-22) compiled in OSX 10.9.4.
I've a SSL in DTLSv1 server mode. Previously in its SSL_CTX I set the
SSL_MODE_ENABLE_PARTIAL_WRITE option to enable SSL_write() to return
less than the given data length. I've also tried to set it at SSL
level with SSL_s
From: Richard Levitte
> The current build system is based on the assumption that you have a
> the base VMS installation with only a C compiler added. No MMS, no
> MMK, no Perl, no nothing. The world doesn't look that way and hasn't
> for a long time, time to catch up.
I don't get out much t
Hi all,
I just wanted to state the fact, that we maintain openssl for os/2 also
on a seperate svn, as we did include some fixes which are not in the
openssl trunk.
We would like to have them in the trunk, but we always thought no one
could even look at them.
And of course removing all os/2 stu
Whoops, OK. :-P
Mike
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Salz, Rich wrote:
>> Just generated a pull request for this; let me know if it's what you actually
>> had in mind:
>>
>> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/161
>
> I already had the fix in-hand :) See attached.
>
>
>
> --
> Principal Se
> Just generated a pull request for this; let me know if it's what you actually
> had in mind:
>
> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/161
I already had the fix in-hand :) See attached.
--
Principal Security Engineer
Akamai Technologies, Cambridge MA
IM: rs...@jabber.me Twitter: RichSal
Just generated a pull request for this; let me know if it's what you
actually had in mind:
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/161
Mike
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Rich Salz via RT wrote:
> Doing "make clean" should remove all build artifacts, while make dclean should
> do clean and t
> Did I miss something, or did you happen to count the includes of "e_os2.h"
> which is not OS/2 specific at all? Or both?
No, I made the stupid mistake.
> The current version of eComStation, 2.1, was released only a year
> after version 2.0, in May 2011.
We were not aware of eComStation. Thank
Hi,
> There are 70 files that have OS2 in them, for a total of 130 instances.
Strange. Here, I obtain:
> grep -r OS2 * | wc -l
52
> grep -r OS2 * | sed "s/\([^:]*\)\:.*/\1/" | uniq | wc -l
22
i.e. 22 files with a total of 52 instances.
Did I miss something, or did you happen to count the
Doing "make clean" should remove all build artifacts, while make dclean should
do clean and then anything special to get back to a distro-like directory. This
ticket is to capture moving any special dclean actions to the clean target.
--
Rich Salz, OpenSSL dev team; rs...@openssl.org
On 21 August 2014 16:08, Marcus Meissner wrote:
>
> It is mostly a suggestion to do some gpg signing if you meet each other
> and also widen the signature circle ;)
>
Agreed - that would be a good thing. Of course actually meeting up is quite
a challenging thing to organise - but something we do
Just issued pull request #160:
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/160
Will update the thread with the RT issue number when it comes through.
Mike
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Dev
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 03:44:50PM +0100, Matt Caswell wrote:
> On 21 August 2014 14:57, Marcus Meissner wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > The 1.0.1i tarball is signed by a different key than the previous releases
> > that were signed by Dr Stephen Henson.
> >
> > $ gpg openssl-1.0.1i.tar.gz.asc
> > gpg:
Can you share the code you have used for testing?
On Thu, 2014-08-21 at 16:14 +0200, Jay True via RT wrote:
> I've tested versions 1.0.0b and 1.0.1i, both have this problem too.
>
> More specifically, it happens only when the application called SSL_write()
> after peer A starts the renegotiation
On 21 August 2014 14:57, Marcus Meissner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The 1.0.1i tarball is signed by a different key than the previous releases
> that were signed by Dr Stephen Henson.
>
> $ gpg openssl-1.0.1i.tar.gz.asc
> gpg: Signature made Wed Aug 6 23:18:48 2014 CEST using RSA key ID 0E604491
> gpg: pl
Ping... Would appreciate getting some of these changes pulled. Ready
to answer any questions, address any issues.
Thanks,
Mike
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 3:27 PM, The default queue via RT
wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> This message has been automatically generated in response to the
> creation of a tr
I've tested versions 1.0.0b and 1.0.1i, both have this problem too.
More specifically, it happens only when the application called SSL_write()
after peer A starts the renegotiation. If SSL_read() is called instead,
those unexpected application data from peer B will be returned.
According to TLS s
Hi,
The 1.0.1i tarball is signed by a different key than the previous releases
that were signed by Dr Stephen Henson.
$ gpg openssl-1.0.1i.tar.gz.asc
gpg: Signature made Wed Aug 6 23:18:48 2014 CEST using RSA key ID 0E604491
gpg: please do a --check-trustdb
gpg: Good signature from "Matt Caswell
> So I would not understand that we go in a hurry to remove WCE compatibility
I do not think we are in a hurry to do that.
Your patch looks nice. I am CC'ing rt, so that this thread becomes an issue
and we'll see the link to your mail.
--
Principal Security Engineer
Akamai Technologies, Camb
Hi,
We have developed a patch to improve performance of SSL_load_client_CA_file.
Given a CA file containing many CA certs, it took a long time to check
duplicates because, inside SSL_load_client_CA_file, sk_X509_NAME_find
executes qsort and bsearch for every cert.
The patch introduces hash to chec
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Salz, Rich wrote:
>> Minor clarification is appropriate. MSDOS is supported in single "stance",
>> namely DJGPP, which is 32-bit environment.
>
> Good point.
>
> So the idea is that MSDOS gets turned into DJGPP. BEOS and OS/2 are removed
> in HEAD (i.e., after 1
Dear All,
At least for WCE, I can say that with this patch:
https://www.mail-archive.com/openssl-dev@openssl.org/msg35958.html
which is W32 compatible and NOT WCE specific,
and consists of only one typedef (which is highly clarifying the code
ALSO for win32) and one CAST error (cast error that S
25 matches
Mail list logo
