[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The netsec thread

From: Paul Eggert
Subject: Re: The netsec thread
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 11:50:17 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0

On 9/5/19 5:12 AM, Robert Pluim wrote:
GNUTLS_TLS1_3 is not a define, itʼs an enum, so we canʼt
check for it with the pre-processor. I guess that means we have to
check based on the GnuTLS version

There's a simpler way; I installed the attached.

By the way, can you verify that :safe-renegotiation is also irrelevant for DTLS? I'm asking because GNUTLS_DTLS1_2 etc. are greater than GNUTLS_TLS1_3 and so "proto <= GNUTLS_TLS1_2" yields 0 for them. I assume that since DTLS is for datagrams there is no renegotiation and so no :safe-renegotation is needed, but I don't know DTLS (I don't even know whether Emacs supports DTLS) and it'd be helpful to get a more-expert opinion. Thanks.

Attachment: 0001-Port-safe-renegotiation-test-to-GnuTLS-3.6.3.patch
Description: Text Data

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]