[openssl.org #1109] Please urgently impelment -utf8 parameter in openssl ca command

I meant to apply this diff file - it's better solution ;) __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org Automated List Manager

[openssl.org #1109] Please urgently impelment -utf8 parameter in openssl ca command

[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Wed Jul 6 01:10:41 2005]: Would You please apply the second DIFF file in sead of the first one ? According to our records, your request has been resolved. If you have any further questions or concerns, please respond to this message. I thought I had applied the

Re: [openssl.org #1109] Please urgently impelment -utf8 parameter in openssl ca command

file in order not to use config options? If yes - where to send it ? - Original Message - From: Stephen Henson via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: openssl-dev@openssl.org Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 2:17 AM Subject: [openssl.org #1109] Please urgently impelment -utf8

Re: [openssl.org #1109] Please urgently impelment -utf8 parameter in openssl ca command

PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: openssl-dev@openssl.org Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 2:17 AM Subject: [openssl.org #1109] Please urgently impelment -utf8 parameter in openssl ca command [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Wed Jul 6 01:10:41 2005]: Would You please apply the second DIFF file in sead

[openssl.org #1109] Please urgently impelment -utf8 parameter in openssl ca command

[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Wed Jul 6 01:40:04 2005]: You applied the 2nd one in stead of the 3rd one. I just forgot about the 1st one. What should I do now in order to apply the 3rd one? Personally I prefer the patch that has been applied over the 3rd one. The applied patch allow the

Re: [openssl.org #1109] Please urgently impelment -utf8 parameter in openssl ca command

06, 2005 3:26 AM Subject: [openssl.org #1109] Please urgently impelment -utf8 parameter in openssl ca command [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Wed Jul 6 01:40:04 2005]: You applied the 2nd one in stead of the 3rd one. I just forgot about the 1st one. What should I do now in order to apply the 3rd one

[openssl.org #1109] Please urgently impelment -utf8 parameter in openssl ca command

[guest - Mon Jul 4 22:05:35 2005]: Is someone going to fix it ? And if yes then when ? Yes and about two minutes ago respectively :-) Steve. __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org

[openssl.org #1109] Please urgently impelment -utf8 parameter in openssl ca command

Finally a better way to fix it ;) The fix adds a new command line switch to openssl ca function that affects the way “-subj” parameter is parsed. The new switch is named “- utf8” and makes possible to send the “-subj” parameter as a string in UTF8 format in order to generate RFC3280 subject

[openssl.org #1109] Please urgently impelment -utf8 parameter in openssl ca command

Here is the diff file: ---openssl-0.9.8-beta5/apps/ca.c.diff begin--- --- openssl-0.9.8-beta5/apps/ca.c.old Mon Jun 13 08:06:11 2005 +++ openssl-0.9.8-beta5/apps/ca.c Mon Jun 13 10:57:21 2005 @@ -174,6 +174,7 @@ -msie_hack - msie modifications to handle all those universal

[openssl.org #1109] Please urgently impelment -utf8 parameter in openssl ca command

Sorry for the previous post. ;( The change is bigger: 1. a new parameters should apear in [ CA_default ] section: utf = yes string_mask = utf8only they should have the same meaning like in [req] section when generating PKCS10 request. 2. a -utf8 command line option is added I attach the

[openssl.org #1109] Please urgently impelment -utf8 parameter in openssl ca command

There is no way to use the -subj parameter in openssl ca ... -subj ${new_subj} ... command in order to follow RFC3280 at “4.1.2.4 Issuer” and “4.1.2.6 Subject” concerning DirectoryString implementation that MUST use “UTF8String” representation. Plase insert the -utf8 parameter, similar to