On 14/04/15 20:24, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 04/14/2015 09:02 PM, Matt Caswell wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 14/04/15 19:45, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> Is it possible to use DTLS with some sort of non-socket BIO?
>>>
>>> Basically, I have datagrams which I know belong to a specific DTLS
>>> session, and I w
Two things to consider with IPSec: key exchange mechanisms as provided by
packages like StrongSwan, and the actual encryption/authentication of
packets that is typically being done by the kernel stack and I believe is
based on the Kernel Crypto API. So I believe to do IPSec you do need both
crypto
Two things to consider with IPSec: key exchange mechanisms as provided by
packages like StrongSwan, and the actual encryption/authentication of
packets that is typically being done by the kernel stack and I believe is
based on the Kernel Crypto API. So I believe to do IPSec you do need both
crypto
On 04/14/2015 09:02 PM, Matt Caswell wrote:
>
>
> On 14/04/15 19:45, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> Is it possible to use DTLS with some sort of non-socket BIO?
>>
>> Basically, I have datagrams which I know belong to a specific DTLS
>> session, and I want to feed them to OpenSSL and get back further
>
On 14/04/15 19:45, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Is it possible to use DTLS with some sort of non-socket BIO?
>
> Basically, I have datagrams which I know belong to a specific DTLS
> session, and I want to feed them to OpenSSL and get back further
> datagrams to send out in response. (This is similar
Is it possible to use DTLS with some sort of non-socket BIO?
Basically, I have datagrams which I know belong to a specific DTLS
session, and I want to feed them to OpenSSL and get back further
datagrams to send out in response. (This is similar to what SSLEngine
does in OpenJDK, except there it's
You could mail it to RT and then it will at least be logged and not forgotten.
But no response within four days isn't surprising.
___
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
Is no-one interested at all about this problem? Or do I need to send it to
another place?
Regards,
John.
From: openssl-users [mailto:openssl-users-boun...@openssl.org] On Behalf Of
John Unsworth
Sent: 10 April 2015 14:54
To: openssl-users@openssl.org
Subject: Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL 1.0.2 S
On 04/14/2015 09:42 AM, jonetsu wrote:
>
>
>> From: "Steve Marquess" Date: 04/14/15 09:31
>>
>
>> and note that of the 101 platforms ("OEs") appearing there, most
>> of those operating systems are neither CC certified nor have any
>> other FIPS 140-2 validated crypto. Keep in mind that at Leve
On 04/13/2015 01:30 PM, Jakob Bohm wrote:
> ..
>>
>> With the very unique exception of the OpenSSL FIPS Object Module, there
>> are no FIPS 140-2 validated cryptographic modules that can be obtained
>> in source form and compiled by the end user. The fact that Red Hat (or
>> whomever) has taken ope
> From: "Steve Marquess"
> Date: 04/14/15 09:31
> and note that of the 101 platforms ("OEs") appearing there, most of
> those operating systems are neither CC certified nor have any other FIPS
> 140-2 validated crypto. Keep in mind that at Level 1 the validation
> applies to the cryptographic
Salz, Rich wrote
> As the old joke goes, "if you have to ask, you can't afford it."
Well, exploration can be free. I noticed that Strongswan uses a plug-in
architecture for crypto that seemingly allows the use of OpenSSL instead of
the kernel for crypto operations, for use under FIPS. Does anyo
12 matches
Mail list logo
