Re: minimum required function calls to perform ssl

>Can we move this discussion to talk about the latest OpenSSL version? >Here's my an update client & server sides that will establish a connection >with a certificate & key called 'dummy_cert.pem' and 'key.pem': I've tried using your code, and I get the following error messages from the server.

Re: send encrypted s/mime message for Netscape to read?

Theodore Hope wrote: > > I need to send a message to a Netscape user (S/MIME), and encrypt > it using the cert he's sent me in a signed message. (In other > words, I'm want my script to behave like another Netscape Mail). > I'm using SSLeay 0.9.0b. > > Presumably I would extract his public key

Re: THE BEST OPPORTUNITY EVER!

Theodore Hope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> [...] openssl-users allows anyone to post for convenience reasons. >> [...] We can change it, of course. Opinions or votes? > I personally vote to allow postings only from subscribers, like with many > other lists. It should not inconvenience those who are

send encrypted s/mime message for Netscape to read?

I need to send a message to a Netscape user (S/MIME), and encrypt it using the cert he's sent me in a signed message. (In other words, I'm want my script to behave like another Netscape Mail). I'm using SSLeay 0.9.0b. Presumably I would extract his public key from the PKCS-7 Signature (smime.p7

Re: Relaying only certifieds

Henri, > I want to restrict access to some inetd services (ie telnet/pop/imap) on > one of my servers to some users over the Net. Sounds like you would need a dedicated server or virtual directory. > s_server continue connection even when client doesn't provide > a certificate (good) Why would

Relaying only certifieds !!!

Hi !!! I want to restrict access to some inetd services (ie telnet/pop/imap) on one of my servers to some users over the Net. Using Redhat, I've allready have installed apache 1.3.4 + mod_ssl 2.2.2 (apache-mod_ssl-1.3.4-2.2.2-0.i386.rpm) and SSLeay 0.9b (SSLeay-0.9.0b-4.i386.rpm + SSLeay-devel

Re: spam

How about a more constructive approach: Why not filter spam? Take a look at http://www.cyberpromo.org/spamfilters.asp They have an extra section for sysadmin tools which helps people remove spam mail before it enters email lists. There is also a program (under Windows) that allows to send

Re: Legal to use OpenSSL ?

Alan Pogrebinschi wrote: > >Gordon Chaffee has posted changes to SSLeay 0.9.0 that call BSafe for the > >RSA algorithms. It would seem that by using this patch, even commercial > >establishments within the US can be legal with respect to the RSA patent. > > And I am still with a chicken-and-egg

Re: spam

At 18:07 14.02.99 -0500, Alicia da Conceicao wrote: > >While we are on the subject of mailing list options, is there any way we >can get the openssl mailing lists to prepend a [openssl-*] to the e-mail >subject headers, like we get with the old [ssl-users] mailing list, the >[apache-ssl] mailing l

Re: THE BEST OPPORTUNITY EVER!

Well, in all cases, we have ti subscribe to read the replies. Besides I hate spamming. So I would votre for allowing only subscribers. John At 02:27 PM 2/14/99 +0100, you wrote: > >In article <000901be578c$db292fa0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > >>> Why is spam on this list?? > >Because openssl-

Re: THE BEST OPPORTUNITY EVER!

- "KingJedi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: | Why is spam on this list?? It happens to every mailing list sooner or later. If the problem becomes overwhelming, the list needs to be closed to non-subscribers. Not that this limitation is hard to get around, but most spammers don't bother. OTOH, such a lim