Hi all,
a few weeks ago OpenSSL 3.0 Alpha1 has been released[1]. It seems to me
that we should check what needs to be adapted in php-src to support
OpenSSL 3.0 as soon as possible. Even if OpenSSL 3.0 will not be ready
by the time PHP 8.0.0 will be released, any potentially required BC
breaks fr
Hi,
I just created a PR [1] to add two new options for ssl/tls streams:
- min_proto_version
- max_proto_version
that can be set to one of the new constants:
- STREAM_CRYPTO_PROTO_SSLv3
- STREAM_CRYPTO_PROTO_TLSv1_0
- STREAM_CRYPTO_PROTO_TLSv1_1
- STREAM_CRYPTO_PROTO_TLSv1_2
It is basically a ran
Hi Jakub,
While working on the OpenSSL 1.1 integration, I've stumbled over this issue
with the sni server test ext/openssl/tests/sni_server.phpt which fails with
error:1416F086:SSL routines:tls_process_server_certificate:certificate verify
failed
I debugged through it and in the end it turns o
On 11/7/2016 3:41 PM, Alice Wonder wrote:
> On 11/07/2016 04:29 AM, Nikita Nefedov wrote:
>> It might make even more sense to not provide a default here at all. As
>> history shows that those methods that are considered secure today can
>> become less-than-desirably secure in a couple of years. Whi
On 11/07/2016 04:29 AM, Nikita Nefedov wrote:
*snip*
Hey,
It might make even more sense to not provide a default here at all. As history
shows that those methods that are considered secure today can become
less-than-desirably secure in a couple of years. Which means the same cycle of
depr
> On 7 Nov 2016, at 03:35, Scott Arciszewski wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Jakub Zelenka wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Scott Arciszewski
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Can we change openssl_public_encrypt() and openssl_private_decrypt() from
>>> defaultin
On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Jakub Zelenka wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Scott Arciszewski
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Can we change openssl_public_encrypt() and openssl_private_decrypt() from
>> defaulting to PKCS1v1.5 padding, in favor of defaulting to OAEP?
>>
>> I'll create
2016-11-06 20:19 GMT+01:00 Jakub Zelenka :
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Scott Arciszewski
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Can we change openssl_public_encrypt() and openssl_private_decrypt() from
> > defaulting to PKCS1v1.5 padding, in favor of defaulting to OAEP?
> >
> > I'll create an R
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Scott Arciszewski
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can we change openssl_public_encrypt() and openssl_private_decrypt() from
> defaulting to PKCS1v1.5 padding, in favor of defaulting to OAEP?
>
> I'll create an RFC for this later. It will just prevent a lot of issues.
>
> To
Hi,
Can we change openssl_public_encrypt() and openssl_private_decrypt() from
defaulting to PKCS1v1.5 padding, in favor of defaulting to OAEP?
I'll create an RFC for this later. It will just prevent a lot of issues.
To wit:
- https://framework.zend.com/security/advisory/ZF2015-10
-
https://gith
Hey
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Davey Shafik wrote:
>
> 7.1 no longer supports LibreSSL due to the usage of some new openssl
> changes, you can find the errors http://awel.domblogger.
> net/7/php7/ssl_error.txt and a patch by the reporter here:
> http://awel.domblogger.net/7/php7/php-7.1.0RC
On 11 Oct 2016 11:57, "Remi Collet" wrote:
>
> Le 20/03/2016 à 20:50, Jakub Zelenka a écrit :
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just wanted to send a quick update about my recent work on openssl
ext in
>
> Can you please update the state of openssl 1.1.0 compatibility ?
>
> I see most work done in master ?
> Not
Remi,
I'm glad this was followed up on, it is likely the source of a reported
issue!
7.1 no longer supports LibreSSL due to the usage of some new openssl
changes, you can find the errors http://awel.domblogger.
net/7/php7/ssl_error.txt and a patch by the reporter here:
http://awel.domblogger.net/
Le 11/10/2016 à 12:56, Remi Collet a écrit :
> Le 20/03/2016 à 20:50, Jakub Zelenka a écrit :
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just wanted to send a quick update about my recent work on openssl ext in
>
> Can you please update the state of openssl 1.1.0 compatibility ?
>
> I see most work done in master ?
> Not in
Le 20/03/2016 à 20:50, Jakub Zelenka a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> I just wanted to send a quick update about my recent work on openssl ext in
Can you please update the state of openssl 1.1.0 compatibility ?
I see most work done in master ?
Not in 7.0 or 7.1 ?
Remi.
P.S. openssl 1.1.0b just hit Fedor
On 15/06/16 03:51, Scott Arciszewski wrote:
> While we're at it, can we also add a function to generate (ephemeral)
> Elliptic Curve Diffie-Hellman keys, and then use openssl_dh_compute_key()
> with ECDH keys? Because that would be a lot saner than having to
> shell_exec() to the OpenSSL binary in
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Dominic Luechinger
wrote:
> This is a short introduction of a feature I've been working on.
>
> Summary
> ---
> The current OpenSSL extension only supports generating RSA key pairs.
> The PR [1] adds support for ECC (Elliptic curve cryptography) key
> generati
This is a short introduction of a feature I've been working on.
Summary
---
The current OpenSSL extension only supports generating RSA key pairs.
The PR [1] adds support for ECC (Elliptic curve cryptography) key
generation. The corresponding bug is 61204 [2].
---
Motivation
--
Why
2016-03-30 21:04 GMT+02:00 Jakub Zelenka :
> There is a PR for that https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/1686 that
> should land in 7.1 if there are no objections...
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Niklas Keller wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> there's an open feature request with a patch since 2012, it
There is a PR for that https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/1686 that should
land in 7.1 if there are no objections...
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Niklas Keller wrote:
> Hi,
>
> there's an open feature request with a patch since 2012, it's still against
> SVN: https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id
Hi,
there's an open feature request with a patch since 2012, it's still against
SVN: https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=61204
Could somebody go ahead, review and merge that patch?
Thanks, Niklas
Hi David
On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 9:08 PM, David Zuelke wrote:
> On 20.03.2016, at 20:50, Jakub Zelenka wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just wanted to send a quick update about my recent work on openssl ext
> in
> > case someone else wanted to start something similar so we don't have a
> > wasted e
>
> > I have got a port of the extension to work on OpenSSL 1.1. There has been
> > quite a bit of changes mainly due to the fact that most structures are
> now
> > opaque (but also some other changes)
>
> I assume 1.0.whatever-is-in-ubuntu will remain usable? Or do we plan on
> requiring 1.1 in, s
On 20.03.2016, at 20:50, Jakub Zelenka wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I just wanted to send a quick update about my recent work on openssl ext in
> case someone else wanted to start something similar so we don't have a
> wasted effort on that. :)
>
> 1. Error queueing
>
> I'm more or less done with a patc
Hi,
I just wanted to send a quick update about my recent work on openssl ext in
case someone else wanted to start something similar so we don't have a
wasted effort on that. :)
1. Error queueing
I'm more or less done with a patch for error storing and clearing OpenSSL
error queue:
https://githu
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Leigh wrote:
>
> In Rogaway's own OCB FAQ it states:
>
> The number τ, the tag length of the scheme, is, like the blockcipher
> E, a parameter of the mode. It’s a number 0 ≤ τ ≤ 128.
>
> http://web.cs.ucdavis.edu/~rogaway/ocb/ocb-faq.htm
>
The OCB is just in open
On 2 February 2015 at 11:46, Jason Gerfen wrote:
> According to documentation provided about the OCB mode of AES it says the
> following:
>
> Section 3: The scheme
>>
>> The tag length is an integer τ ∈ [0 .. n]. ... As for the tag length, a
>> suggested default of τ = 64 is reasonable. Tags of 32
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 3:58 AM, Leigh wrote:
> On 2 February 2015 at 10:57, Leigh wrote:
> > length (not sure how of
>
> Not sure how often tag lengths aside from 16 are used.
>
According to documentation provided about the OCB mode of AES it says the
following:
Section 3: The scheme
> The
On 2 February 2015 at 10:57, Leigh wrote:
> length (not sure how of
Not sure how often tag lengths aside from 16 are used.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On 1 February 2015 at 17:57, Jakub Zelenka wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I have already implemented all of this in crypto ext (
> https://github.com/bukka/php-crypto ) and also added support for streams
> (e.g.
> https://github.com/bukka/php-crypto/blob/master/tests/stream_filters_cipher_gcm_dec_read.phpt
> )
Hey
On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Leigh wrote:
> On 31 January 2015 at 16:13, Jason Gerfen wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Leigh wrote:
> >> At the very basic end of the spectrum, we could have openssl_get_tag
> >> and openssl_set_tag, or add an extra parameter to the end of
> >
On 31 January 2015 at 16:13, Jason Gerfen wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Leigh wrote:
>> At the very basic end of the spectrum, we could have openssl_get_tag
>> and openssl_set_tag, or add an extra parameter to the end of
>> openssl_encrypt and openssl_decrypt (pass by ref for encrypt,
On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Leigh wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> A couple of bug reports have highlighted the fact that our
> openssl_encrypt and openssl_decrupt functions have no way of getting
> or setting tags required for authenticated cipher modes (i.e. GCM,
> CCM, OCB (not sure if this is avail
Hi list,
A couple of bug reports have highlighted the fact that our
openssl_encrypt and openssl_decrupt functions have no way of getting
or setting tags required for authenticated cipher modes (i.e. GCM,
CCM, OCB (not sure if this is available in OpenSSL)).
https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=68962
h
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 19/09/2014 17:30, Daniel Lowrey a écrit :
> In an effort to fix a very old (seven years old) DoS vulnerability
> involving encrypted streams I created a regression where feof()
> notifications on encrypted sockets are broken. This is present in
>
Hi folks!
I know this isn't the kind of fun stuff people want to deal with on Friday
but ...
In an effort to fix a very old (seven years old) DoS vulnerability
involving encrypted streams I created a regression where feof()
notifications on encrypted sockets are broken. This is present in both th
Hi Ralph,
Btw, I added custom capath ini setting for curl already. It allows you to
set it and use updated cert db as provided on curl site:
http://www.php.net/manual/en/curl.configuration.php#ini.curl.cainfo
Something similar could be possible for openssl. Can you open a feature
request on bugs
Hey all,
An odd problem has cropped up that I think can be solved at the PHP
level. Basically, on Ubuntu (and other distributions), using ssl stream
context with verify_peer = true could potentially fail. This is due to
the fact that OpenSSL, seemingly, only has a compile-time value for
CAp
Heh, I think given that we have 5.3 out there (with the code) there is little
reason to introduce new features into a bug fix release which is 5.2.
On 2009-11-24, at 4:51 PM, Rob Richards wrote:
> If I had only checked... Appears its been in trunk (and 5_3) for over 2 years
> now :)
>
> Rob
>
If I had only checked... Appears its been in trunk (and 5_3) for over 2
years now :)
Rob
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Seems like a no-brainer for 5.3 and trunk. You will have to discuss
with Ilia for 5.2. It seems a bit late in the game for that branch to
get this.
-Rasmus
Rob Richards wrote:
Seems like a no-brainer for 5.3 and trunk. You will have to discuss
with Ilia for 5.2. It seems a bit late in the game for that branch to
get this.
-Rasmus
Rob Richards wrote:
> The openssl extension is way to restrictive in the algorithms it
> supports, i.e. no support for SHA265 which is star
The openssl extension is way to restrictive in the algorithms it
supports, i.e. no support for SHA265 which is starting to become the
standard algo to use, etc.. Rather than having to always add more
constants and additional logic for any new algorithms, I'd like to
change the sign and verify f
Scott MacVicar escribió:
> If you don't care don't pass a parameter.
ohh.. right, I misinterpreted it .. sorry ;)
--
"A computer is like an Old Testament god, with a lot of rules and no
mercy. "
Cristian Rodríguez R.
Platform/OpenSUSE - Core Services
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH
Research & Deve
On 25 Sep 2008, at 22:59, Cristian Rodríguez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Scott MacVicar escribió:
Hi All,
Attached and uploaded [1] is a patch to add the OpenSSL random pseudo
byte function, at the moment it will return FALSE if the bytes aren't
considered cryptographically strong, I am ho
Scott MacVicar escribió:
> Hi All,
>
> Attached and uploaded [1] is a patch to add the OpenSSL random pseudo
> byte function, at the moment it will return FALSE if the bytes aren't
> considered cryptographically strong, I am however considering making
> this parameter controlled.
>
> Any objectio
hi Scott,
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 3:08 AM, Scott MacVicar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Attached and uploaded [1] is a patch to add the OpenSSL random pseudo byte
> function, at the moment it will return FALSE if the bytes aren't considered
> cryptographically strong, I am however consid
On 03.09.2008, at 03:08, Scott MacVicar wrote:
Hi All,
Attached and uploaded [1] is a patch to add the OpenSSL random
pseudo byte function, at the moment it will return FALSE if the
bytes aren't considered cryptographically strong, I am however
considering making this parameter controlle
>
> This function has been in OpenSSL for 8 years and supported by every version
> since 0.9.5. It's literally just exposing the API, it's safe for inclusion
> in 5.3 in my opinion.
>
I didn't express myself very clearly. What I meant is that we should
probably add that switch for the return right
On 3 Sep 2008, at 03:33, David Coallier wrote:
2008/9/2 Scott MacVicar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi All,
Attached and uploaded [1] is a patch to add the OpenSSL random
pseudo byte
function, at the moment it will return FALSE if the bytes aren't
considered
cryptographically strong, I am however
2008/9/2 Scott MacVicar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi All,
>
> Attached and uploaded [1] is a patch to add the OpenSSL random pseudo byte
> function, at the moment it will return FALSE if the bytes aren't considered
> cryptographically strong, I am however considering making this parameter
> controlled
Hi All,
Attached and uploaded [1] is a patch to add the OpenSSL random pseudo
byte function, at the moment it will return FALSE if the bytes aren't
considered cryptographically strong, I am however considering making
this parameter controlled.
Any objections to me applying this to 5.3?
S
Hi,
Please top to make easy problems an endless pain please. And stop to
mix every topics you can think about in every single discussions.
Also it would be nice if you get cooler and stop to harass me on every
single reply or commit, get a life, do something, whatever helps but
stop to harass me.
Pierre,
I must be going crazy. Is there an actual problem that needs solving?
You're saying that a user who improperly installs php_openssl.dll (i.e.
does not follow instructions and set up ssleay.dll and libeay.dll) should
magically be able to use phar with openssl? Why?
You are not going
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 2:46 AM, Greg Beaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I must be going crazy. Is there an actual problem that needs solving?
> You're saying that a user who improperly installs php_openssl.dll (i.e.
> does not follow instructions and set up ssleay.dll and libeay.dll) should
>
Hi Greg,
I must be going crazy. Is there an actual problem that needs solving?
Yep, solved yesterday.
You're saying that a user who improperly installs php_openssl.dll (i.e.
does not follow instructions and set up ssleay.dll and libeay.dll) should
magically be able to use phar with openss
Pierre Joye wrote:
As testing has_xxx at runtime looks shiny and powerful, I don't think
it is worth the pain.
What pain?
Greg
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Steph Fox wrote:
Hi Pierre,
OK, I got back to the rest of your email now (caffeine always helps, eh).
I'm not sure it makes sense to have the ssl optional features enabled
but not ext/openssl. Or to say it better, I don't see the gain. What
is the gain besides being able to say: "heh you can
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 7:21 PM, Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> if (!PHAR_G(has_zlib)) ...
>
> Pierre, you'd still need to test for them at runtime whether they were
> listed as a soft dependency or not!
No, not if they are not soft dependencies, this is what is done in 99%
of the php e
if (!PHAR_G(has_zlib)) ...
Pierre, you'd still need to test for them at runtime whether they were
listed as a soft dependency or not!
- Steph
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> My main question now is why don't you actually reflect the (optional)
>> dependencies? bz2 and zlib compression available will not be available
>> if bz2 or zlib is not present, same for openssl.
>
> What do you mean? In conf
Pierre,
I finally took a look at why phar is not built shared as all other
extension. It seems to force it only to be able to be run with no dep
but still uses them if they are lately added (given that phar is now
built statically, that makes little sense). But in fact, it does have
deps agains
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We can sign and verify OpenSSL signatures without ext/openssl if we have the
> library dependency. In other words, this (with the module checks in util.c
> commented out) works fine:
I finally took a look at why phar is
Hey Pierre,
--enable-phar-ssl and do (not tested but it gives the idea):
if (PHP_PHAR_SSL == "yes") {
ADD_EXTENSION_DEP("phar", "openssl", true);
} else {
Erm... no, you've definitely missed the point. ADD_EXTENSION_DEP() only
works in one of the four possible scenarios, and that one
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You're missing that Windows users don't tend to roll their own PHP. They
> tend to pick and choose their extensions.
I still miss your point here, I was only talking about bins releases
for windows.
> At present, if someone
Hi Pierre,
OK, I got back to the rest of your email now (caffeine always helps, eh).
I'm not sure it makes sense to have the ssl optional features enabled
but not ext/openssl. Or to say it better, I don't see the gain. What
is the gain besides being able to say: "heh you can use the ssl
featur
Hi Martin,
Would --with-openssl imply --enable-phar-ssl then? Sounds like a good
idea to me.
It certainly could... but what about distro builds?
- Steph
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Hi Pierre,
--with-openssl is used by ext/openssl and will continue to be used
like it is now (I'm thinking of adding --with-openssl-dir for
consistency but that's all).
This has absolutely no bearing on my question. Perhaps I expressed myself
badly.
- Steph
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runti
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems we don't use the openssl extension API at all in ext/phar, just the
> actual OpenSSL headers and libs. That means Phar with OpenSSL support can be
> both built and run without ext/openssl being built at all, but requ
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems we don't use the openssl extension API at all in ext/phar, just the
> actual OpenSSL headers and libs. That means Phar with OpenSSL support can be
> both built and run without ext/openssl being built at all, but requi
Hi Greg, all,
It seems we don't use the openssl extension API at all in ext/phar, just the
actual OpenSSL headers and libs. That means Phar with OpenSSL support can be
both built and run without ext/openssl being built at all, but requires
third-party libs (under Windows at least - ssleay32.d
Pierre wrote:
Hi Thomas, Wez,
On 1/13/07, Wez Furlong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Thomas,
I think Marcus gave you all the right pointers.
I just wanted to let you know that I have a pending patch for DH kex
and some bignum functions, and that Pierre mentioned that he's been
working on a few
Hi Thomas, Wez,
On 1/13/07, Wez Furlong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Thomas,
I think Marcus gave you all the right pointers.
I just wanted to let you know that I have a pending patch for DH kex
and some bignum functions, and that Pierre mentioned that he's been
working on a few other bits rece
Hi Thomas,
I think Marcus gave you all the right pointers.
I just wanted to let you know that I have a pending patch for DH kex
and some bignum functions, and that Pierre mentioned that he's been
working on a few other bits recently.
If you think that we'll be overlapping, we can try harder to ei
Hello Thomas,
read all README.* files and the CODING_STANDARDS (php is very picky).
For an introduction to writing extensions look here: http://talks.somabo.de
There is also an artivel series from Sara Golemon somewhere on the Zend site
and she also published a neat book on the topic. However PH
I want to access some of the more obscure OpenSSL functions (about 20)
from PHP and would like to contribute what I need access to from OpenSSL
in PHP back to the community.
To that end, I've downloaded the source code for PHP 5.2.0 and started
looking at the C source for the OpenSSL portion to h
Just one patch will be fine.
We usually accept patches for new features against HEAD of CVS only,
but with the unicode development effort that is ongoing in HEAD, you
might find it a little bit harder to do that.
My suggestion is to make the patch for 5.1.2 and make sure it all
works first, and th
Wez Furlong wrote:
Ah yes.
http://us3.php.net/manual/en/function.openssl-pkey-export.php almost
does what you want... but only works on private keys.
I'd welcome a patch for that too.
Do you want separate patches for PKCS12 and PEM keys or should it be all one
patch?
Has anything changed tha
Ah yes.
http://us3.php.net/manual/en/function.openssl-pkey-export.php almost
does what you want... but only works on private keys.
I'd welcome a patch for that too.
--Wez.
On 4/25/06, Brandon Fosdick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wez Furlong wrote:
> > Like this:
> > http://us2.php.net/manual/en/
Wez Furlong wrote:
Like this:
http://us2.php.net/manual/en/function.openssl-pkey-get-public.php
or something else?
Close, but I need them in PEM format.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On 4/24/06, Brandon Fosdick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wez Furlong wrote:
> > You can reach me at this email address too.
>
> Which address do you prefer?
This one for PHP stuff.
> I need the PKCS12 functions
> and the ability to extract public keys
Like this:
http://us2.php.net/manual/en/func
Wez Furlong wrote:
You can reach me at this email address too.
Which address do you prefer?
I need the PKCS12 functions and the ability to extract public keys, so I was
thinking I'd add both, but I don't want to step on anybody's toes. I've never
played around in the PHP internals before so
You can reach me at this email address too.
--Wez.
On 4/23/06, Brandon Fosdick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hannes Magnusson wrote:
> > Hi Brandon
> >
> > On 4/23/06, Brandon Fosdick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Is the OpenSSL extension still being maintained? I'm looking at adding
> >> some
Hannes Magnusson wrote:
Hi Brandon
On 4/23/06, Brandon Fosdick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is the OpenSSL extension still being maintained? I'm looking at adding some
needed functionality and don't know who to talk to about it.
php-src/EXTENSIONS:
EXTENSION: openssl
PRIMARY MAINTAIN
Hi Brandon
On 4/23/06, Brandon Fosdick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is the OpenSSL extension still being maintained? I'm looking at adding some
> needed functionality and don't know who to talk to about it.
>
php-src/EXTENSIONS:
EXTENSION: openssl
PRIMARY MAINTAINER: Wez Furlong <[EMAI
Is the OpenSSL extension still being maintained? I'm looking at adding some
needed functionality and don't know who to talk to about it.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Actually, I was talking about the Linux build, but I wasn't aware of it
being used from the system. My mistake.
Ron
"Zeev Suraski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Maybe he meant the Windows build..?
>
> Zeev
>
> At 17:27 03/09/2004, George Schlossnagle wrote:
> >PHP
Maybe he meant the Windows build..?
Zeev
At 17:27 03/09/2004, George Schlossnagle wrote:
PHP use the OpenSSL library on your system. Perhaps it's time for you to
consider an upgrade.
George
On Sep 3, 2004, at 9:54 AM, Ron Korving wrote:
I have nothing to gain from this directly myself, but I did
PHP use the OpenSSL library on your system. Perhaps it's time for you
to consider an upgrade.
George
On Sep 3, 2004, at 9:54 AM, Ron Korving wrote:
I have nothing to gain from this directly myself, but I did wonder
about
this:
Why is the OpenSSL library used still version 0.9.6c from December
I have nothing to gain from this directly myself, but I did wonder about
this:
Why is the OpenSSL library used still version 0.9.6c from December 2001
while there have been many more releases since then, with the latest release
being from March 2004? Maybe it's time to consider an upgrade?
Ron
-
Hi,
I once read (can't remember where) that the OpenSSL segfault problem was a
known issue? If not, I'll write a bugreport.
In short:
I use PHP5.0.0, and I experience a segfault (and if I remember correctly) at
random times. I believe it worked most of the time, but regularly would
segfault.
If
90 matches
Mail list logo
