back to article 3 years, 17 alphas, 2 betas, and over 7,500 commits later, OpenSSL version 3 is here

The OpenSSL team has released version 3.0 of its eponymous secure communications library after a lengthy gestation period. Coming nearly three years after its predecessor, version 1.1.1, the update lays claim to 17 alpha releases, two beta releases, and more than 7,500 commits. Equally significant is a near-doubling of the …

  1. karlkarl Silver badge

    "3 years, 17 alphas, 2 betas, and over 7,500 commits later"

    ... and a number of forks ;)

    1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      ...and a partridge in a key pair!

  2. John Robson Silver badge

    If ever

    There was a bit of software for which “when it’s ready” is the only appropriate release date…

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    So does this mean

    NSA gave their seal of approval ? Asking for a friend, you know.

    1. Overcharged Aussie

      Re: So does this mean

      Replying for a friend...No.

      1. Silver badge

        Re: So does this mean

        You're not my friend, pal.

    2. A random security guy

      Re: So does this mean

      The GCHQ also stamped it. The real kiss of death.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    1.1.1 to 3.0?

    What happened to version 2?

    1. Julz

      Re: 1.1.1 to 3.0?

      See above, didn't get GCHQ approval ;)

    2. -v(o.o)v-

      Re: 1.1.1 to 3.0?

      Pah, sequential versions, so 20th century.

      Bigger numbers are better and some are so good they approach 3 digits, needing extra testing.

    3. Jon 37

      Re: 1.1.1 to 3.0?

      There's an extension for OpenSSL that is certified by the US government, which some government contracts require. That was separate, and had version 2.0. Now it's integrated into OpenSSL, and they needed to avoid two "version 2.0" releases of that module. So they called the whole thing version 3.0.

    4. Arthur the cat Silver badge

      Re: 1.1.1 to 3.0?

      1+1+1 = 3


  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Congratulations. From all that I've ever heard, it was a code base that needed some cleaning, and was going to take a lot of effort to clean. I've never coded that deep into a system; SSL was always wrapped by coders who came before me on projects, and I just used what they'd built.

    Kudos none the less. I'm sure this simplifies things for a lot of formerly-hairy code. :)

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like