|
|
ESOE Development |
Hi all,
I can clarify a little here. We developed against a 0.9.8 version (the
As Bradley mentioned, the later the better. I wouldn't be keen on fixing any
Regards,
2009/2/15 Bradley Beddoes <bedd...@intient.com>
> Hi,
> It depends on it in a number of ways the most important being:
> signature / document verification on unmarshaling
> regards
> On 14/02/2009, at 6:14 PM, Luke Daley wrote:
> > Hey guys,
> > Anyone know what the minimum version of OpenSSL that ESOE supports is?
> > Out of interest, how is saml2cpp depending on OpenSSL?
> > Cheers,
> > LD.
> Bradley Beddoes
> Twitter: @bradleybeddoes
specific version escapes me, but 0.9.8e sounds about right). We currently
have a production SPEP running on Redhat 4 which uses 0.9.7a (not sure if
this has Redhat-specific patches).. So at the least, it is API-compatible
with that version.
bugs that were caused by earlier versions of OpenSSL than 0.9.7.
Shaun
> I believe the minimum was 0.9.8e but the later the better.
> signature generation for marshaling
> key verification for metadata extraction
> various load/store routines for keys
> Bradley
> Lead Software Architect
> Intient Pty Ltd