Leaderboard

OpenSSL has released a new version 3.1.0, Windows binaries are available in SVN and the overnight zip file and separately from http://wiki.overbyte.eu/wiki/index.php/ICS_Download or https://www.magsys.co.uk/delphi/magics.asp This is a minor release that does not require a new version of ICS, the main improvement is a FIPS 140-3 compliant FIPS Provider, 3.0 was FIPS 140-2. Note the ICS Windows build can not be FIPS approved. There have been numerous performance improvements implemented compared to the OpenSSL 3.0 release. Plans for future OpenSSL releases are at: https://www.openssl.org/roadmap.html Angus

To avoid flooding another thread with unrelated posts about VCL quality and bugs, I have opened this topic for discussion about VCL in general and VCL Styles. First, I would like to respond to comment made by @Attila Kovacs VCL is not abandoned, not even close. Maybe it is not receiving too many new features as people would hope so, but it has more to do with its maturity than anything else. FMX (is) was in frenzy development cycle, only because it didn't have the needed features VCL already had, and it still does not have all. So it may have seemed that FMX is getting all the love and attention, but that was not the case. Many new Windows related features introduced since FMX has come to play, are still VCL only. Keep in mind that IDE is based on VCL, and I don't see that changing in foreseeable future. VCL is evolving and it will continue to evolve. It is not that FMX is new better, improved framework mean to replace VCL for all purposes, it is framework with completely different architecture and it covers different use cases. While some functionality certainly overlaps, and there are (Windows only) applications where both VCL and FMX can be chosen, there are also applications where VCL is far better (and sometimes, even only viable) choice. VCL Styles are buggy, they have been buggy since they were introduced in XE2. But, they are now part of the IDE. That means two things. First, IDE is now suffering from some bugs, but it also means that those bugs will get fixed sooner rather than later. Unfortunately, not all bugs can be solved overnight, and the more specific, reproducible bug reports there are, the higher are chances that those bugs will get a fix. If you have any filed VCL bug reports you might want to share, please do so.

I think that "Format C:" It's faster, isn't it? 😂 😂 😂

I said that a book is better than a post.

A reflection on the discussion and on the concepts of "trusted". If by trusted it is meant that the connection between the client and the server is practically secure and that the client knows who the server is, then the concept of trusted is verified with the use of a server-side certificate (possibly issued by a recognized certifier and not by a self-signed certificate) and an encrypted connection via TLS, and that's what the example I posted does. But if we expand the concept of trusted, as I think @shineworld intends, then it is more complex to apply it. The "expanded" concept is that the connecting client is known and certified as if it were a server. A standard certificate (similar to that of the server) on the client side is not applicable because the files are exposed, especially the private key even if protected by a password, and anyone who can access the station could "copy" it. A solution would be a "hardware" certificate (as in a USB token), but it is not an economic solution and there is a fairly important management for the tokens: it must be said that many private companies and all public companies have by now equipped employees with a USB token or similar (token like credit card, etc ....). Other easily applicable solutions are then: apply the concept of "registration": at the very first connection (client installation) the client sends runtime data to the server (date and time of installation, processor UUID, etc ....) which the server registers (with its own coding ) and will use to test future connections. The client will send this data at each new connection and the server will refuse the connection if they are not included in the list of already registered clients. OBVIOUSLY THESE DATA MUST NOT BE DISCLOSED, IE MUST NOT PUBLICLY KNOW IF AND WHAT THE CLIENT SENDS TO THE SERVER (otherwise it is enough for a fake client to replicate the data of a real client to replace itself). apply the classic concept of username / password, but it makes sense if the entry is done by operator, if it has to be automated it means that username and password must be stored locally .... so other local encryption, .... etc ... . Bye

Thank you for the feedback. I did not realize that Apple changed their push notification process that much, as I have been disconnected from it for a long time 😄 Problem on my server side was: I did not use a jwt. All sorted now 🙂

I post a simple TCP sample using SLL (TLSv1_2). It's only a little start point, but may help you. Inside there are the OpenSSL Win64 dll 1.0.2u and one certificate self signed valid for one year (localohst, 127.0.0.1). There is also a DHParam file used for DH "chiper" protocol, not necessary and not used. From there you can improve security, authentication, etc .... Bye TCPS Demo.zip

The LLDB seems to require a Python distribution compiled with the "--enable-shared" flag. The regular APT Python distribution doesn't use the dynamically linked interpreter. However, Installing python3.x-dev and libpython3.x-dev should be enough for this case. Make sure to install the same versions.

That's what I was talking about. AI won't kill us in the way you have seen it in the television. It will kill us with wrong answers.

P.S. Good luck with the writing