Re: Wrong system clock vs X.509 date specifiers

2013-03-14 Thread David Woodhouse
On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 16:30 +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:09:54 +0100 > David Howells wrote: > > > > > The X.509 certificate has a pair of times in it that delineate the valid > > period of the cert, and I'm checking that the system clock is within the > > bounds they define be

Re: Wrong system clock vs X.509 date specifiers

2012-09-25 Thread David Howells
How about the attached? I knew perl had to be good for something... David --- #!/usr/bin/perl -w # # Generate an X.509 certificate from a public key. # # Format: # # gen-x509-cert \ # [C=] [O=] [CN=] [Email=] \ # [--from=] [--to=output # use strict; use POSIX qw(strftime

Re: Wrong system clock vs X.509 date specifiers

2012-09-25 Thread Tomas Mraz
On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 18:31 +0100, David Howells wrote: > Tomas Mraz wrote: > > > You can use openssl ca that allows to set arbitrary start date to > > generate selfsigned certs as well (-selfsign option). > > That seems to require some stuff I don't have installed: > > warthog>openssl ca -in

Re: Wrong system clock vs X.509 date specifiers

2012-09-25 Thread David Howells
Tomas Mraz wrote: > You can use openssl ca that allows to set arbitrary start date to > generate selfsigned certs as well (-selfsign option). That seems to require some stuff I don't have installed: warthog>openssl ca -in signing_key.priv -extensions v3_ca -out newcert.pem Using configuration f

Re: Wrong system clock vs X.509 date specifiers

2012-09-25 Thread Tomas Mraz
On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 16:35 +0100, David Howells wrote: > Alan Cox wrote: > > > Generate a certificate that is valid from a few minutes before the > > wallclock time. It's a certificate policy question not a kernel hackery > > one. > > That doesn't seem to be possible with openssl req. What wo

Re: Wrong system clock vs X.509 date specifiers

2012-09-25 Thread Alan Cox
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:35:20 +0100 David Howells wrote: > Alan Cox wrote: > > > Generate a certificate that is valid from a few minutes before the > > wallclock time. It's a certificate policy question not a kernel hackery > > one. > > That doesn't seem to be possible with openssl req. What w

Re: Wrong system clock vs X.509 date specifiers

2012-09-25 Thread Paolo Bonzini
Il 25/09/2012 17:35, David Howells ha scritto: > Alan Cox wrote: > >> > Generate a certificate that is valid from a few minutes before the >> > wallclock time. It's a certificate policy question not a kernel hackery >> > one. > That doesn't seem to be possible with openssl req. What would you re

Re: Wrong system clock vs X.509 date specifiers

2012-09-25 Thread David Howells
Alan Cox wrote: > Generate a certificate that is valid from a few minutes before the > wallclock time. It's a certificate policy question not a kernel hackery > one. That doesn't seem to be possible with openssl req. What would you recommend? David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the li

Re: Wrong system clock vs X.509 date specifiers

2012-09-25 Thread Alan Cox
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:09:54 +0100 David Howells wrote: > > The X.509 certificate has a pair of times in it that delineate the valid > period of the cert, and I'm checking that the system clock is within the > bounds they define before permitting you to use the cert. I've been setting > the exp