OpenSSL v1.0.0 for Indy


after one year of beta testing, the OpenSSL team published the final 1.0 version yesterday. As of today you can download a precompiled version of the OpenSSL libaries from our official Indy Mirror (The Fulgan Mirror).

Direct Link:

As always: You’ll find a ReadMe, License Information and File Hashes inside the zip archive. This version is including important bug and security fixes, using it is strongly recommended.

Note: This version needs the very latest Indy SVN (Revision #4168 and newer). This is due to changes in OpenSSL (i.e. removing deprecated MD2 by default).

I would like to thank my previous readers, especially Salvor for pointing out a different way in building the libraries without the need for the MS VC++ Runtime DLLs while being able to use the latest VC++ compilers.

This release is built using MS VC++ 2008 and the Network Wide Assembler (NASM) instead of Mingw/gcc which allows us to create smaller DLLs and faster code now (sadly the VC++ 2010 build chain is still broken for OpenSSL 1.0).



2 thoughts on “OpenSSL v1.0.0 for Indy

  1. One major thing I can see is that you are not using dynamic engines. For OpenSSL 1.0.0, this is the default behavior and that could effect what functions and structures are exposed. If we deviate too far, we are likely to create conflicts if developers start using other .DLL versions with Indy.

    I can understand why developers may need their own custom OpenSSL compilations and there’s several different ways of doing it. WHat I’m saying is just be careful.

  2. @J. Peter Mugaas

    Thanks for the attention and having an eye on it 😉

    Regarding the Win platform there is no difference by using static engines. Engine support is only related to the support of hardware cryptographic providers, which by default are included in the Mingw32/gcc build chain on Win32 too (as it is the unix build chain). On other systems those engines might be used dynamically using the .so/.lib files.

    By including static engines we allow support of the new GOST engine (bit misplaced there).

    Other structures and exposed functionality are not affected from what I can tell (I checked the OpenSSL sources to be sure).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s