On Tuesday 13 September 2011 19:53:07 you wrote:
> I have a use case for one of the product that I work on. I need to know if
> the passwords on the unix machines are weak.
> The passwords are hashed using blowfish algorithm. I shall be doing
> dictionary encryption using blowfish API to find the w
On Saturday 25 June 2011 02:16:50 you wrote:
> MBA:/ David$ sudo port -v install openssl
> Password:
> ---> Computing dependencies for openssl.
> ---> Cleaning openssl
> ---> Removing work directory for openssl
>
> MBA:/ David$ openssl version
> -bash: openssl: command not found
That isn't test
On Tuesday 17 May 2011 03:10:59 ffrei...@rockwellcollins.com wrote:
> The book was printed in june 2002 and I need the ECDSA per DSS IPSB 186-3
That doesn't mean that you won't get the information you need. For example,
the EVP interface is generalised, so using it with SHA384 isn't really any
di
On Saturday 09 April 2011 08:02:08 Stanisław Findeisen wrote:
> Hi
>
> Where can I find up to date SSL 3.0 specification?
There isn't one. The "up to date" specification would be TLS 1.2.
There was a proposal for SSL 3 to become an IETF doc:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tls-ssl-version3
On Saturday, February 12, 2011 09:34:54 am Mitchell, Lisa via RT wrote:
> Hi, Any possibility of getting a reply to this? We need to satisfy our
> lawyers. :-)
I think your chances of getting a response this year are low - I'm waiting on
a request to use the name for a QCA backend for about 3 ye
On Saturday, February 12, 2011 09:34:54 am Mitchell, Lisa via RT wrote:
> Hi, Any possibility of getting a reply to this? We need to satisfy our
> lawyers. :-)
I think your chances of getting a response this year are low - I'm waiting on
a request to use the name for a QCA backend for about 3 ye
On Monday, December 20, 2010 08:02:39 pm noloa...@gmail.com via RT wrote:
-page of the "openssl x509" command line tool for details. The old behaviour
+page of the "openssl x509" commandline tool for details. The old behaviour
I think either "command line" or "commandline" is OK, but the former is
On Thursday 09 November 2006 02:04, Alaka Pathy wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I recently built OpenSSL 0.9.7l binaries in a Solaris
> machine.
As in, you compiled source you downloaded?
> When I check the version, I get as 0.9.8d, whereas for
> Windows I do get the version correctly as 0.9.7l.
>
> Is there
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm starting to look at the OCSP stapling extension (RFC3546 Section 3.6) for
TLS. Along the way, I noticed a couple of typos.
Brad
Index: CHANGES
===
RCS file: /home/bradh/coding/openssl-repo/openssl/CHANGES,v
retrieving revision 1.
Brad Hards wrote:
> I'm trying to determine the length (in bits) for my DSA and DH keys. I'm
> happily using RSA_size() for RSA keys, and I assumed that DSA_size and
> DH_size would do equivalent operations (based on the man page for
> BN_size_bits, which states 'I
11 matches
Mail list logo
