Re: [openssl-dev] [openssl-users] Windows OpenSSL's FIPS Binaries

2017-12-19 Thread Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd
> does anybody know if there are downloadable binaries of 
> openssl-fips and/or openssl-fips-ecp (2.0.16 or earlier) for 
> Windows ?

http://wiki.overbyte.eu/wiki/index.php/ICS_Download

We have OpenSSL 1.0.2m-fips for Win32, primarily for application
testing since our DLLs would not pass FIPS approval processes.  They
are windows code signed.  

Also normal 1.1.0 and 1.0.2 versions for Win32 and Win64, all code
signed. 

Angus

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev


Re: [openssl-dev] [openssl-users] DTLS in multi-thread and concurrent connection acceptance environment

2017-11-28 Thread Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd
> I don't know if anyone has ever created any metrics on how far it 
> can be scaled. I've certainly not seen it if they have. But there
> are no knownlimitations on this approach (this is the intended
> way to do things).

Our Delphi OpenSSL implementation on Windows mostly uses a single
thread and event driven code, although Windows itself uses a thread per
connection. But we don't support DTLS.  

I did some testing last year with simple SSL TCP/IP client and server
on Windows 10, and had 2,000 simultaneous SSL sessions running on the
same PC, always thought client versions of Windows supported far fewer
sessions.

The main limitation during testing with a single thread was the set-up
time for SSL, there is a limit of how many new sessions can be started
per second.  My test was starting 100 sessions per second, and about
20% failed initially, but succeeded later on retries. 

I used my own applications for testing, ComCap5 and ComGen5 from
https://www.magsys.co.uk/comcap/ 

ComGen is a TCP/UDP session data generator, configurable for multiple
IPs and ports, and volume of sessions.  

Angus
  

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev


Re: [openssl-dev] Creating requests and certificates with Subject Alternative Names

2017-09-22 Thread Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd
> I'm creating X509 certificate requests and certificates in code, 
> trying to add X509v3 Subject Alternative Name, with 1.1.0f.  
> 
> But if I add a list of four domains, ie: 
> The certificate seems to ignore some and repeat others:

To answer my own question, I was using ASN1_STRING_set0 instead of
ASN1_STRING_set and the original ANSI string was a temporary variable,
so got lost as a new string was added since it was not copied. 

But there must be an easier way of adding SANs to certificates than
using undocumented GENERAL_NAME APIs.   

Angus

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev


[openssl-dev] 1.1.0 pre5 seems to ignore CIPHER_SERVER_PREFERENCE

2016-05-26 Thread Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd
I have two custom Windows web sites, running released and beta versions
of OpenSSL.  The beta version only gets an A- score with SSL Labs,
whereas the release version gets A+.  

https://www1.telecom-tariffs.co.uk/serverinfo.htm

shows server status, and that it's running OpenSSL 1.1.0-pre5 (beta) 19
Apr 2016, SSL Labs says: 'Cipher Suites (sorted by strength as the
server has no preference;)  The server does not support Forward Secrecy
with the reference browsers. Grade reduced to A-.'

https://www.telecom-tariffs.co.uk/serverinfo.htm

is the main live server running OpenSSL 1.0.2h 3 May 2016, and gets a
score A+ saying 'Cipher Suites (SSL 3+ suites in server-preferred
order)'. 

The application is identical with CIPHER_SERVER_PREFERENCE specified
and a Mozilla intermediate cipher list (shown on the status page), but
SSL Labs suggests there is no server preference so forward security
ciphers are not prioritised. 

The OpenSSL implementation is for Windows Embarcadero Delphi and the
free ICS internet component suite which I support, it uses our own
Pascal version of the OpenSSL C header files, originally created 10
years ago and updated for each new OpenSSL release, so there is a risk
we might miss subtle header changes like constants changing.

I realise pre5 is a month old, but can not see this issued raised in
the last month.   

Angus
 


-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev