Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1313305
| From | One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] X.509: Handle midnight alternative notation in GeneralizedTime |
| Date | 2016-01-20 16:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qT31v-8um-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qT2yu-8hL-29@gated-at.bofh.it> <qNlDP-14y-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <qNlDP-14y-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <qT2RQ-8pt-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | Intel Corporation |
On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 15:20:00 +0000 David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote: > Rudolf Polzer <rpolzer@google.com> wrote: > > > As for 24:xx:yy times - I'm split about this. This code doesn't > > require a bijective decoding anyway (and if it did, 24:00:00 and > > 00:00:00 mapping to the same time64_t would be problem enough) so this > > is sure safe. On the other hand, a cert with a 24:xx:yy time that's > > not 24:00:00 probably should be regarded as invalid and not trusted > > for that reason alone. > > Feel free to argue that one with Linus:-/ Pedantic hat on 24:00:01 is also potentially valid. The ANSI and ISO standards allow for double leap seconds even though CCIR-460 doesn't allow it to actually happen. Alan
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] X.509: Handle midnight alternative notation in GeneralizedTime Rudolf Polzer <rpolzer@google.com> - 2016-01-20 16:10 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] X.509: Handle midnight alternative notation in GeneralizedTime David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-01-20 16:30 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] X.509: Handle midnight alternative notation in GeneralizedTime One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> - 2016-01-20 16:40 +0100
csiph-web