Displaying 20 results from an estimated 600 matches similar to: "2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?"
2018 Jul 29
4
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
>> facing [ no shared cipher ] error with EC private keys.
> the client connecting to your instance has to support ecdsa
>
>
It does - Thunderbird 60.0b10 (64-bit)
[ security.ssl3.ecdhe_ecdsa_aes_256_gcm_sha384;true ]
It seems there is a difference between the private key (rsa vs. ecc ->
SSL_CTX?) used for the certificate signing request and the signed
certificate.
The csr
2018 Jul 30
2
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
>>>> facing [ no shared cipher ] error with EC private keys.
>>> the client connecting to your instance has to support ecdsa
>>>
>>>
>> It does - Thunderbird 60.0b10 (64-bit)
>>
>> [ security.ssl3.ecdhe_ecdsa_aes_256_gcm_sha384;true ]
>>
>> It seems there is a difference between the private key (rsa vs. ecc ->
>>
2018 Jul 30
2
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
>>>>>> facing [ no shared cipher ] error with EC private keys.
>>>>> the client connecting to your instance has to support ecdsa
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> It does - Thunderbird 60.0b10 (64-bit)
>>>>
>>>> [ security.ssl3.ecdhe_ecdsa_aes_256_gcm_sha384;true ]
>>>>
>>>> It seems there is
2018 Jul 30
0
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
On 29.07.2018 23:39, ????? wrote:
>>> facing [ no shared cipher ] error with EC private keys.
>> the client connecting to your instance has to support ecdsa
>>
>>
> It does - Thunderbird 60.0b10 (64-bit)
>
> [ security.ssl3.ecdhe_ecdsa_aes_256_gcm_sha384;true ]
>
> It seems there is a difference between the private key (rsa vs. ecc ->
> SSL_CTX?)
2018 Jul 30
0
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
> On 29 July 2018 at 23:39 ????? <vtol at gmx.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> >> facing [ no shared cipher ] error with EC private keys.
> > the client connecting to your instance has to support ecdsa
> >
> >
>
> It does - Thunderbird 60.0b10 (64-bit)
>
> [ security.ssl3.ecdhe_ecdsa_aes_256_gcm_sha384;true ]
>
> It seems there is a
2018 Jul 30
0
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
> On 30 July 2018 at 20:01 ????? <vtol at gmx.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> >>>> facing [ no shared cipher ] error with EC private keys.
> >>> the client connecting to your instance has to support ecdsa
> >>>
> >>>
> >> It does - Thunderbird 60.0b10 (64-bit)
> >>
> >> [
2018 Jul 30
0
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
>>>>>>> facing [ no shared cipher ] error with EC private keys.
>>>>>> the client connecting to your instance has to support ecdsa
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> It does - Thunderbird 60.0b10 (64-bit)
>>>>>
>>>>> [ security.ssl3.ecdhe_ecdsa_aes_256_gcm_sha384;true ]
>>>>>
2018 Jul 30
3
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
> On 30 July 2018 at 20:37 ????? <vtol at gmx.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> >>>>>>> facing [ no shared cipher ] error with EC private keys.
> >>>>>> the client connecting to your instance has to support ecdsa
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> It does - Thunderbird 60.0b10 (64-bit)
>
2018 Jul 30
0
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
> I did some local testing and it seems that you are using a curve that is not acceptable for openssl as a server key.
>
> I tested with openssl s_server -cert ec-cert.pem -key ec-key.pem -port 5555
>
> using cert generated with brainpool. Everything works if I use prime256v1 or secp521r1. This is a limitation in OpenSSL and not something we can really do anything about.
>
>
2018 Jul 30
2
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
<!doctype html>
<html>
<head>
<meta charset="UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
On 30 July 2018 at 21:00 ѽ҉ᶬḳ℠ <
<a href="mailto:vtol@gmx.net">vtol@gmx.net</a>> wrote:
</div>
<div>
<br>
2018 Jul 29
0
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
Am 29.07.2018 um 21:06 schrieb ?????:
> facing [ no shared cipher ] error with EC private keys.
the client connecting to your instance has to support ecdsa
Andreas
2020 Apr 04
3
how to pick cipher for AES-NI enabled AMD GX-412TC SOC tincd at 100% CPU
Hello everybody,
First a big thanks for tinc-vpn I am still using it next to wireguard
and openvpn.
I am having a setup where the tinc debian appliance is at 100% cpu load
doing about 7.5MB/s.
Compression = 9
PMTU = 1400
PMTUDiscovery = yes
Cipher = aes-128-cbc
How can I pick a cipher that is the fasted for my CPU and don't create a
CPU bottleneck at 100%.
Kind regards,
Jelle de Jong
2018 Jul 30
0
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
>>
>>> I did some local testing and it seems that you are using a curve
>>> that is not acceptable for openssl as a server key.
>>> I tested with openssl s_server -cert ec-cert.pem -key ec-key.pem
>>> -port 5555
>>> using cert generated with brainpool. Everything works if I use
>>> prime256v1 or secp521r1. This is a limitation in OpenSSL
2018 Jul 31
0
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
> Perhaps for whose interested - IETF RFC 7027 specifies for TLS use:
>
> [ brainpoolP256r1 | brainpoolP384r1 | brainpoolP512r1 ]
>
> And thus t1 would not work anyway. However, having tested r1 the result
> was just the same.
>
> A tcpdump during the openssl test [ s_server | s_client ] then revealed
> (TLSv1.2 Record Layer: Handshake Protocol: Client Hello) :
>
>
2018 Jul 31
0
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
>
>>> Perhaps for whose interested - IETF RFC 7027 specifies for TLS use:
>>>
>>> [ brainpoolP256r1 | brainpoolP384r1 | brainpoolP512r1 ]
>>>
>>> And thus t1 would not work anyway. However, having tested r1 the result
>>> was just the same.
>>>
>>> A tcpdump during the openssl test [ s_server | s_client ] then revealed
2018 Jul 31
0
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
> Yeah, it needs to be recompiled to fix.
>
Sure, no worries.? Thanks for the quick turnaround on the patch.
Downstream is notified and pending migration into their package.
Meanwhile ssl_alt_key/certs does the trick. I am grateful that such
option is even provisioned or else I would a be in rather bad spot with
the CA. Other apps are rather ignorant on that matter.
2018 Jul 31
2
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
On 31.07.2018 09:30, ????? wrote:
>>>> Perhaps for whose interested - IETF RFC 7027 specifies for TLS use:
>>>>
>>>> [ brainpoolP256r1 | brainpoolP384r1 | brainpoolP512r1 ]
>>>>
>>>> And thus t1 would not work anyway. However, having tested r1 the result
>>>> was just the same.
>>>>
>>>> A tcpdump
2018 Jul 30
2
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
>>>> I did some local testing and it seems that you are using a curve
>>>> that is not acceptable for openssl as a server key.
>>>> I tested with openssl s_server -cert ec-cert.pem -key ec-key.pem
>>>> -port 5555
>>>> using cert generated with brainpool. Everything works if I use
>>>> prime256v1 or secp521r1. This is a
2019 Apr 11
1
decrypt.rb
> On 11 April 2019 17:44 David Salisbury via dovecot <dovecot at dovecot.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 4/11/2019 1:50 AM, Aki Tuomi wrote:
> >
> >> ...
> >> So, not being an expert at encryption, what are the ramifications of
> >> those digests being read as different values in the two different
> >> places???? I do notice that the
2019 Apr 11
2
decrypt.rb
> On 11 April 2019 00:49 David Salisbury via dovecot <dovecot at dovecot.org> wrote:
>
>
> >>>
> >> Yes. I gave it a try here, and it seems to work. Does it give any extra
> >> information if you include -i flag?
> >>
> >> Aki
> >>
> >
> > Yes, I had tried that, and it doesn't give much extra information, at