On: OpenSSL 1.1.1 End of Life Approaching

[sylware]

How much is planned obsolescence there?

[SEMW → sylware]

..No, not wanting to indefinitely maintain arbitrarily-old versions of a free and open-source security library is not "planned obsolesence".

[sylware → SEMW]

The devil hides in the details.

[bee_rider → sylware]

Could you elaborate on the details? It seems like a pretty silly thing, to engage in duplicitous business practices to sell more… free code.

[sylware → bee_rider]

Usually, it is in non-pertinent ABI/API breakage.

And companies which are making a business at upgrading components like openssl are the ones which would be targetted for a planned obsolescence crack down.

Usually, it is c++ ABI issues (those are usually a massive pain), or glibc versioning manic usage, since there are rarely API/ABI breakages in many crypto libs.

[Am4TIfIsER0ppos → sylware]

Almost all security is built around "planned obsolescence" given certificate expiry.

"It works now but in 1 minute it will cease to"

[sylware → Am4TIfIsER0ppos]

API/ABI wise, and of course, certificate data could be fetch independently from the library.