On Dec 13, 2007 8:14 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I thought that might be the issue too but that file is in /usr/lib/nss
> on my system. (Presumably because I used "apt-get install libnss3-
> tools")
Please run the following commands on your system and post their
outputs here.
echo $LD_LI
> NSS 3.11 has a new shared library named libfreebl3.so. I suspect that
> you're missing that file.
>
> Wan-Teh
I thought that might be the issue too but that file is in /usr/lib/nss
on my system. (Presumably because I used "apt-get install libnss3-
tools")
When I've built nss3.11.7 from sourc
Ismail Dönmez wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Over at Novell bugzilla [0] its reported that nss fails to build with gcc
> 4.3 . GCC developer Richard Guenther identified that
> lib/freebl/mpi/mp_comba.c seems to be miscompiled. But he says some of the
> inline assembly there is possibly invalid.
>
> I th
* Robert Relyea:
>> Oh, how unfortunate. Is it possible to disable all certificate checks?
> So the question naturally arises: "why do you want this?".
I want to get rid of the HTTPS confirmation dialogs for testing
automation purposes, preferably without patching the source code. (The
latter
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote, On 2007-12-10 17:18:
> > I am having problems using signtool with any version of NSS from 3.11
> > onwards and I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing anything obvious
> > before I submit a bug report.
> >
> > In the past I have used nss-3.9 to sign objects without any pro
Nelson Bolyard wrote:
Maybe this is news only to me. :-)
There is something out there called Domain Signatures (I think), which
is meant to be processed by your Email ISP and converted into something
that supposedly you trust.
The push for this is the need to get 'quiet' signatures becaus
On Dec 13, 2007 4:27 AM, D3!$ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!!!
>
> I found that this file contains several such "unnamed" error codes to
> which I have no clue... Can anybody kindly help me with finding what
> they actually indicate to the OS...???
51 and other codes passed to the exit() fun
No, this is news to me too, Nelson.
So, if I understand this correctly, the primary difference
between what this message contains and S/MIME is that they
chose to use a proprietary format for securing the e-mail
as opposed to an industry standard that has been around for
nearly 2 decades and is im
Hi,
On 071213 at 16:30, Michael Ströder wrote:
> Steffen Schulz wrote:
> > SRP is a great protocol also for authentication against your email
> > provider or WLAN[1] access point.
> > [..]
> > That said, I agree that web-authentication is the major use case for
> > TLS-SRP in NSS.
> Hmm, without h
Steffen Schulz wrote:
>
> SRP is a great protocol also for authentication against your email
> provider or WLAN[1] access point.
> [..]
> That said, I agree that web-authentication is the major use case for
> TLS-SRP in NSS.
Hmm, without having looked at tls-srp but from my experience SSL/TLS
co
Hi!!!
I found that this file contains several such "unnamed" error codes to
which I have no clue... Can anybody kindly help me with finding what
they actually indicate to the OS...???
Warm Regards,
D3|\||\|!$
___
dev-tech-crypto mailing list
dev-tech
Oh wellmaybe I'll come of with yet another standard:
StartComVerySecureAndGoodEVCompatibleSSL/SMIME
Please add my super secure standard to NSS and add a specially colored
UI indicator to ThunderBird and Firefox (prefered color is green). Much
appreciated.
Nelson Bolyard wrote:
> Maybe this
On Thursday 13 December 2007 09:53:51 pm Nelson Bolyard wrote:
> So, one wonders:
> - Does signed email become something only EV-eligible parties can send?
Is it really "EV" equivalent? Is there really enough rigour being applied to
make sure these people are "really nice and friendly"? How does
Mhhh...where are status meetings concerning NSS etc. published? I think
it used to be announced on this list in the past...
Nelson Bolyard wrote:
> Gervase Markham wrote, On 2007-11-16 08:35:
>
>> Nelson Bolyard wrote:
>>
>>> I suspect (and speculate here) that this is because code signin
Hi all,
Over at Novell bugzilla [0] its reported that nss fails to build with gcc
4.3 . GCC developer Richard Guenther identified that
lib/freebl/mpi/mp_comba.c seems to be miscompiled. But he says some of the
inline assembly there is possibly invalid.
I think it should be checked by one of th
Gervase Markham wrote, On 2007-11-16 08:35:
> Nelson Bolyard wrote:
>> I suspect (and speculate here) that this is because code signing just
>> isn't very important to Mozilla.
>
> I think it may (also) be true that all of the Mozilla people subscribed
> either do not know very much about code s
Maybe this is news only to me. :-)
Today I received an email from a nationally known merchant with whom I
have done a lot of business. The mail headers included a number of
things I had never seen before (shown below). A very brief examination
showed that those headers included these items, all
17 matches
Mail list logo
