Re: Test of disabled renegotiation in 0.9.8l

2009-11-18 Thread owen2
...@openssl.org -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Test-of-disabled-renegotiation-in-0.9.8l-tp26301719p26385119.html Sent from the OpenSSL - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. __ OpenSSL Project

Re: Test of disabled renegotiation in 0.9.8l

2009-11-18 Thread Kyle Hamilton
                          majord...@openssl.org -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Test-of-disabled-renegotiation-in-0.9.8l-tp26301719p26385119.html Sent from the OpenSSL - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com

Re: Test of disabled renegotiation in 0.9.8l

2009-11-12 Thread Boyle Owen
Probably not intended, at least behavior of current 0.9.8-stable CVS is different now. See my mail with quite similar question: http://marc.info/?l=openssl-devm=125792743829558w=2 Thanks Tomas, interesting post... I have tested various builds against the client renegotiation vulnerability

Re: Test of disabled renegotiation in 0.9.8l

2009-11-12 Thread Lutz Jaenicke
Boyle Owen wrote: PPS: Although I have subscribed to this list, I am not getting the mails (I have to keep checking the archives). Is there anyone who can check out my account? Hmm. If memory serves me right there was a subscribe message sent to the list instead of the mailing list

Test of disabled renegotiation in 0.9.8l

2009-11-11 Thread Boyle Owen
Greetings, I am testing the behaviour of 0.9.8l with respect to client renegotiation. The build is httpd-2.2.14 with openssl-0.9.8l on Solaris 10. I do: $ openssl s_client -connect wibble:443 ... GET / HTTP/1.1 Host:wibble R RENEGOTIATING Then the

Re: Test of disabled renegotiation in 0.9.8l

2009-11-11 Thread Tomas Hoger
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:00:09 +0100 Boyle Owen owen.bo...@six-group.com wrote: This stays like this until I kill the session. Is this the intended behaviour? I thought it was supposed to drop the connection? Probably not intended, at least behavior of current 0.9.8-stable CVS is different now.