From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stefan_Fr=F6berg?= Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 21:03:52 +0300 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] openssl: security bump to version 1.0.0j In-Reply-To: <502E7775.2060006@zacarias.com.ar> References: <1336751148-28858-1-git-send-email-gustavo@zacarias.com.ar> <20120817184902.61d989c0@skate> <502E7775.2060006@zacarias.com.ar> Message-ID: <502E8788.7050808@petroprogram.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net 17.8.2012 19:55, Gustavo Zacarias kirjoitti: > On 08/17/12 13:49, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > >> At http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/148560/ we have a patch that has >> been sitting for a long time, which bumps the version of openssl to >> 1.0.1. Looking at the OpenSSL website, I see that both the 1.0.0X >> versions and 1.0.1X versions are maintained. Do you know what they >> mean, and whether we should stay at 1.0.0 or move to 1.0.1? >> >> I simply would like to know what to do with this patch in our >> patchwork :) >> >> Thanks! >> >> Thomas > 1.0.1 is security-vulnerable, so it can't be bumped as-is, the target > should be 1.0.1c at the moment. > The big difference between 1.0.0* and 1.0.1* is that the later has > initial support for TLSv1.1 and TLSv1.2 among other minor details. > Both are API compatible though not ABI (and we don't care). > I can give it a test during the weekend and give it a go for -next. > Regards. Don't know about 1.0.1c version (or greater) but what's it worth, I have had version 1.0.1b sitting in my buildroot copy like ages and so far have not noticed anything strange in my buildroot based home distro. Best regards Stefan > _______________________________________________ > buildroot mailing list > buildroot at busybox.net > http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot