[openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2j published

2016-09-26 Thread OpenSSL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 OpenSSL version 1.0.2j released === OpenSSL - The Open Source toolkit for SSL/TLS https://www.openssl.org/ The OpenSSL project team is pleased to announce the release of version 1.0.2j of our open source

[openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.1.0b published

2016-09-26 Thread OpenSSL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 OpenSSL version 1.1.0b released === OpenSSL - The Open Source toolkit for SSL/TLS https://www.openssl.org/ The OpenSSL project team is pleased to announce the release of version 1.1.0b of our open source

[openssl-users] OpenSSL Security Advisory

2016-09-26 Thread OpenSSL
users should upgrade to 1.0.2j The issue was reported to OpenSSL on 22nd September 2016 by Bruce Stephens and Thomas Jakobi. The fix was developed by Matt Caswell of the OpenSSL development team. References == URL for this Security Advisory: https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20160926.txt

[openssl-users] integral size mismatch in EVP_DecodeInit

2016-09-26 Thread Geoffrey Coram
Hi - I'm building OpenSSL 1.0.2j for Windows CE; my build just failed this morning with an "integral size mismatch in argument." In crypto\evp\encode.c, there's this declaration: static unsigned char conv_ascii2bin(unsigned char a); but in the function int EVP_DecodeUpdate(...) the call v = con

[openssl-users] Why 1.0.1 AND 1.0.2 ?

2016-09-26 Thread REIX, Tony
Hi, We (BullFreeware project: http://www.bullfreeware.com/) port OpenSSL on AIX, since ages. Since BullFreeware is not a distro (we do not deliver packages built all-together, rather we deliver RPM packages than may stay un-updated during years), we maintain a compatibility with older versions

Re: [openssl-users] Why 1.0.1 AND 1.0.2 ?

2016-09-26 Thread Salz, Rich
> However, out of more ABIs delivered by 1.0.2 compared to 1.0.1, I do not > understand what is the exact difference between versions 1.0.1 and 1.0.2 . Perhaps look at the CHANGES file in 1.0.2 and see what's been added? 1.0.1 only gets bugfixes, 1.0.2 adds features, but starting with 1.0.2a on

[openssl-users] calloc vs kssl_calloc

2016-09-26 Thread Geoffrey Coram
Hi - In kssl.c around line 747, there's a definition of kssl_calloc. Why, then, on line 875, is there a call to just "calloc" ? Also line 1230,1262, 2058. (This is in openssl-1.0.2j) Thanks. -- openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] calloc vs kssl_calloc

2016-09-26 Thread Salz, Rich
Kssl_calloc calls openssl_malloc which means the data must be free'd with openssl_free. And in debug builds any non-free'd data is a leak and reported. Ton line 875 the data is allocated and never free'd, so it skips the leak detection. In some of those other places, perhaps it's because the

Re: [openssl-users] calloc vs kssl_calloc

2016-09-26 Thread Benjamin Kaduk
On 09/26/2016 11:01 AM, Salz, Rich wrote: > Kssl_calloc calls openssl_malloc which means the data must be free'd with > openssl_free. And in debug builds any non-free'd data is a leak and reported. > Ton line 875 the data is allocated and never free'd, so it skips the leak > detection. In som

Re: [openssl-users] calloc vs kssl_calloc

2016-09-26 Thread Geoffrey Coram
On 09/26/2016 12:11, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > > On 09/26/2016 11:01 AM, Salz, Rich wrote: > > Kssl_calloc calls openssl_malloc which means the data must be > free'd with openssl_free. And in debug builds any non-free'd data is > a leak and reported. Ton line 875 the data is allocated and never >

[openssl-users] Building on Windows against run-time library

2016-09-26 Thread Wei Sun
Hello, Just joined the list, and apologize if the following question was answered before. I'm building openssl 1.1.0b on Windows. It is stated that it defaults to /MD while building openssl, so is there a way to change the linker option to /MT? Wei, regards -- openssl-users