| 
									
										
										
										
											2000-09-20 23:52:26 +08:00
										 |  |  |   ENGINE | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   ====== | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |   With OpenSSL 0.9.6, a new component was added to support alternative | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   cryptography implementations, most commonly for interfacing with external | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   crypto devices (eg. accelerator cards). This component is called ENGINE, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   and its presence in OpenSSL 0.9.6 (and subsequent bug-fix releases) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   caused a little confusion as 0.9.6** releases were rolled in two | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-07 14:13:40 +08:00
										 |  |  |   versions, a "standard" and an "engine" version. In development for 0.9.7, | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |   the ENGINE code has been merged into the main branch and will be present | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   in the standard releases from 0.9.7 forwards. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2000-09-20 23:52:26 +08:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |   There are currently built-in ENGINE implementations for the following | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   crypto devices: | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2000-09-20 23:52:26 +08:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2016-02-27 00:21:55 +08:00
										 |  |  |       o Microsoft CryptoAPI | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |       o VIA Padlock | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2000-09-20 23:52:26 +08:00
										 |  |  |       o nCipher CHIL | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   In addition, dynamic binding to external ENGINE implementations is now | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   provided by a special ENGINE called "dynamic". See the "DYNAMIC ENGINE" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   section below for details. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   At this stage, a number of things are still needed and are being worked on: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |       1 Integration of EVP support. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |       2 Configuration support. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |       3 Documentation! | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 1 With respect to EVP, this relates to support for ciphers and digests in | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   the ENGINE model so that alternative implementations of existing | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   algorithms/modes (or previously unimplemented ones) can be provided by | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   ENGINE implementations. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 2 Configuration support currently exists in the ENGINE API itself, in the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   form of "control commands". These allow an application to expose to the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   user/admin the set of commands and parameter types a given ENGINE | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   implementation supports, and for an application to directly feed string | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   based input to those ENGINEs, in the form of name-value pairs. This is an | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   extensible way for ENGINEs to define their own "configuration" mechanisms | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   that are specific to a given ENGINE (eg. for a particular hardware | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   device) but that should be consistent across *all* OpenSSL-based | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   applications when they use that ENGINE. Work is in progress (or at least | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   in planning) for supporting these control commands from the CONF (or | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   NCONF) code so that applications using OpenSSL's existing configuration | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   file format can have ENGINE settings specified in much the same way. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   Presently however, applications must use the ENGINE API itself to provide | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   such functionality. To see first hand the types of commands available | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   with the various compiled-in ENGINEs (see further down for dynamic | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   ENGINEs), use the "engine" openssl utility with full verbosity, ie; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        openssl engine -vvvv | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2000-09-20 23:52:26 +08:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  | 3 Documentation? Volunteers welcome! The source code is reasonably well | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   self-documenting, but some summaries and usage instructions are needed - | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   moreover, they are needed in the same POD format the existing OpenSSL | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   documentation is provided in. Any complete or incomplete contributions | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   would help make this happen. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2000-09-20 23:52:26 +08:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |   STABILITY & BUG-REPORTS | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   ======================= | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2000-09-20 23:52:26 +08:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   What already exists is fairly stable as far as it has been tested, but | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |   the test base has been a bit small most of the time. For the most part, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   the vendors of the devices these ENGINEs support have contributed to the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   development and/or testing of the implementations, and *usually* (with no | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   guarantees) have experience in using the ENGINE support to drive their | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   devices from common OpenSSL-based applications. Bugs and/or inexplicable | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   behaviour in using a specific ENGINE implementation should be sent to the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   author of that implementation (if it is mentioned in the corresponding C | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   file), and in the case of implementations for commercial hardware | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   devices, also through whatever vendor support channels are available.  If | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   none of this is possible, or the problem seems to be something about the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   ENGINE API itself (ie. not necessarily specific to a particular ENGINE | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   implementation) then you should mail complete details to the relevant | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   OpenSSL mailing list. For a definition of "complete details", refer to | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   the OpenSSL "README" file. As for which list to send it to; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      openssl-users: if you are *using* the ENGINE abstraction, either in an | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |           pre-compiled application or in your own application code. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      openssl-dev: if you are discussing problems with OpenSSL source code. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   USAGE | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   ===== | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   The default "openssl" ENGINE is always chosen when performing crypto | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   operations unless you specify otherwise. You must actively tell the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   openssl utility commands to use anything else through a new command line | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   switch called "-engine". Also, if you want to use the ENGINE support in | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   your own code to do something similar, you must likewise explicitly | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   select the ENGINE implementation you want. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   Depending on the type of hardware, system, and configuration, "settings" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   may need to be applied to an ENGINE for it to function as expected/hoped. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   The recommended way of doing this is for the application to support | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   ENGINE "control commands" so that each ENGINE implementation can provide | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   whatever configuration primitives it might require and the application | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   can allow the user/admin (and thus the hardware vendor's support desk | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   also) to provide any such input directly to the ENGINE implementation. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   This way, applications do not need to know anything specific to any | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   device, they only need to provide the means to carry such user/admin | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   input through to the ENGINE in question. Ie. this connects *you* (and | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   your helpdesk) to the specific ENGINE implementation (and device), and | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   allows application authors to not get buried in hassle supporting | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   arbitrary devices they know (and care) nothing about. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   A new "openssl" utility, "openssl engine", has been added in that allows | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   for testing and examination of ENGINE implementations. Basic usage | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   instructions are available by specifying the "-?" command line switch. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   DYNAMIC ENGINES | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   =============== | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   The new "dynamic" ENGINE provides a low-overhead way to support ENGINE | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   implementations that aren't pre-compiled and linked into OpenSSL-based | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   applications. This could be because existing compiled-in implementations | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   have known problems and you wish to use a newer version with an existing | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   application. It could equally be because the application (or OpenSSL | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   library) you are using simply doesn't have support for the ENGINE you | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   wish to use, and the ENGINE provider (eg. hardware vendor) is providing | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   you with a self-contained implementation in the form of a shared-library. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   The other use-case for "dynamic" is with applications that wish to | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   maintain the smallest foot-print possible and so do not link in various | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   ENGINE implementations from OpenSSL, but instead leaves you to provide | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   them, if you want them, in the form of "dynamic"-loadable | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   shared-libraries. It should be possible for hardware vendors to provide | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   their own shared-libraries to support arbitrary hardware to work with | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   applications based on OpenSSL 0.9.7 or later. If you're using an | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   application based on 0.9.7 (or later) and the support you desire is only | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   announced for versions later than the one you need, ask the vendor to | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   backport their ENGINE to the version you need. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   How does "dynamic" work? | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   ------------------------ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     The dynamic ENGINE has a special flag in its implementation such that | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     every time application code asks for the 'dynamic' ENGINE, it in fact | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     gets its own copy of it. As such, multi-threaded code (or code that | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     multiplexes multiple uses of 'dynamic' in a single application in any | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     way at all) does not get confused by 'dynamic' being used to do many | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-07 14:13:40 +08:00
										 |  |  |     independent things. Other ENGINEs typically don't do this so there is | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |     only ever 1 ENGINE structure of its type (and reference counts are used | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     to keep order). The dynamic ENGINE itself provides absolutely no | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     cryptographic functionality, and any attempt to "initialise" the ENGINE | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     automatically fails. All it does provide are a few "control commands" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     that can be used to control how it will load an external ENGINE | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     implementation from a shared-library. To see these control commands, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     use the command-line; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        openssl engine -vvvv dynamic | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     The "SO_PATH" control command should be used to identify the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     shared-library that contains the ENGINE implementation, and "NO_VCHECK" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     might possibly be useful if there is a minor version conflict and you | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     (or a vendor helpdesk) is convinced you can safely ignore it. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-07-08 23:16:10 +08:00
										 |  |  |     "ID" is probably only needed if a shared-library implements | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |     multiple ENGINEs, but if you know the engine id you expect to be using, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     it doesn't hurt to specify it (and this provides a sanity check if | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     nothing else). "LIST_ADD" is only required if you actually wish the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     loaded ENGINE to be discoverable by application code later on using the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     ENGINE's "id". For most applications, this isn't necessary - but some | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     application authors may have nifty reasons for using it. The "LOAD" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     command is the only one that takes no parameters and is the command | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     that uses the settings from any previous commands to actually *load* | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     the shared-library ENGINE implementation. If this command succeeds, the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     (copy of the) 'dynamic' ENGINE will magically morph into the ENGINE | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     that has been loaded from the shared-library. As such, any control | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     commands supported by the loaded ENGINE could then be executed as per | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     normal. Eg. if ENGINE "foo" is implemented in the shared-library | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     "libfoo.so" and it supports some special control command "CMD_FOO", the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     following code would load and use it (NB: obviously this code has no | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     error checking); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        ENGINE *e = ENGINE_by_id("dynamic"); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        ENGINE_ctrl_cmd_string(e, "SO_PATH", "/lib/libfoo.so", 0); | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-07-08 23:16:10 +08:00
										 |  |  |        ENGINE_ctrl_cmd_string(e, "ID", "foo", 0); | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |        ENGINE_ctrl_cmd_string(e, "LOAD", NULL, 0); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        ENGINE_ctrl_cmd_string(e, "CMD_FOO", "some input data", 0); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     For testing, the "openssl engine" utility can be useful for this sort | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     of thing. For example the above code excerpt would achieve much the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     same result as; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        openssl engine dynamic \ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |                  -pre SO_PATH:/lib/libfoo.so \ | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-07-08 22:57:09 +08:00
										 |  |  |                  -pre ID:foo \ | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |                  -pre LOAD \ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |                  -pre "CMD_FOO:some input data" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     Or to simply see the list of commands supported by the "foo" ENGINE; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        openssl engine -vvvv dynamic \ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |                  -pre SO_PATH:/lib/libfoo.so \ | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-07-08 22:57:09 +08:00
										 |  |  |                  -pre ID:foo \ | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |                  -pre LOAD | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     Applications that support the ENGINE API and more specifically, the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     "control commands" mechanism, will provide some way for you to pass | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     such commands through to ENGINEs. As such, you would select "dynamic" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     as the ENGINE to use, and the parameters/commands you pass would | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     control the *actual* ENGINE used. Each command is actually a name-value | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     pair and the value can sometimes be omitted (eg. the "LOAD" command). | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     Whilst the syntax demonstrated in "openssl engine" uses a colon to | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     separate the command name from the value, applications may provide | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     their own syntax for making that separation (eg. a win32 registry | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     key-value pair may be used by some applications). The reason for the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     "-pre" syntax in the "openssl engine" utility is that some commands | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     might be issued to an ENGINE *after* it has been initialised for use. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     Eg. if an ENGINE implementation requires a smart-card to be inserted | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-07 14:13:40 +08:00
										 |  |  |     during initialisation (or a PIN to be typed, or whatever), there may be | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |     a control command you can issue afterwards to "forget" the smart-card | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     so that additional initialisation is no longer possible. In | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     applications such as web-servers, where potentially volatile code may | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     run on the same host system, this may provide some arguable security | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     value. In such a case, the command would be passed to the ENGINE after | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     it has been initialised for use, and so the "-post" switch would be | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     used instead. Applications may provide a different syntax for | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     supporting this distinction, and some may simply not provide it at all | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     ("-pre" is almost always what you're after, in reality). | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2000-09-20 23:52:26 +08:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |   How do I build a "dynamic" ENGINE? | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   ---------------------------------- | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     This question is trickier - currently OpenSSL bundles various ENGINE | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     implementations that are statically built in, and any application that | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     calls the "ENGINE_load_builtin_engines()" function will automatically | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     have all such ENGINEs available (and occupying memory). Applications | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     that don't call that function have no ENGINEs available like that and | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     would have to use "dynamic" to load any such ENGINE - but on the other | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     hand such applications would only have the memory footprint of any | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     ENGINEs explicitly loaded using user/admin provided control commands. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     The main advantage of not statically linking ENGINEs and only using | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-07 14:13:40 +08:00
										 |  |  |     "dynamic" for hardware support is that any installation using no | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     "external" ENGINE suffers no unnecessary memory footprint from unused | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |     ENGINEs. Likewise, installations that do require an ENGINE incur the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     overheads from only *that* ENGINE once it has been loaded. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2000-09-20 23:52:26 +08:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |     Sounds good? Maybe, but currently building an ENGINE implementation as | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     a shared-library that can be loaded by "dynamic" isn't automated in | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     OpenSSL's build process. It can be done manually quite easily however. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     Such a shared-library can either be built with any OpenSSL code it | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     needs statically linked in, or it can link dynamically against OpenSSL | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     if OpenSSL itself is built as a shared library. The instructions are | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     the same in each case, but in the former (statically linked any | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     dependencies on OpenSSL) you must ensure OpenSSL is built with | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-07 14:13:40 +08:00
										 |  |  |     position-independent code ("PIC"). The default OpenSSL compilation may | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |     already specify the relevant flags to do this, but you should consult | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     with your compiler documentation if you are in any doubt. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2000-09-20 23:52:26 +08:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |     This example will show building the "atalla" ENGINE in the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     crypto/engine/ directory as a shared-library for use via the "dynamic" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     ENGINE. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     1) "cd" to the crypto/engine/ directory of a pre-compiled OpenSSL | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        source tree. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     2) Recompile at least one source file so you can see all the compiler | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        flags (and syntax) being used to build normally. Eg; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |            touch hw_atalla.c ; make | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        will rebuild "hw_atalla.o" using all such flags. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     3) Manually enter the same compilation line to compile the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        "hw_atalla.c" file but with the following two changes; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |          (a) add "-DENGINE_DYNAMIC_SUPPORT" to the command line switches, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 (b) change the output file from "hw_atalla.o" to something new, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |              eg. "tmp_atalla.o" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     4) Link "tmp_atalla.o" into a shared-library using the top-level | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        OpenSSL libraries to resolve any dependencies. The syntax for doing | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        this depends heavily on your system/compiler and is a nightmare | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        known well to anyone who has worked with shared-library portability | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        before. 'gcc' on Linux, for example, would use the following syntax; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |           gcc -shared -o dyn_atalla.so tmp_atalla.o -L../.. -lcrypto | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     5) Test your shared library using "openssl engine" as explained in the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        previous section. Eg. from the top-level directory, you might try; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |           apps/openssl engine -vvvv dynamic \ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |               -pre SO_PATH:./crypto/engine/dyn_atalla.so -pre LOAD | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        If the shared-library loads successfully, you will see both "-pre" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        commands marked as "SUCCESS" and the list of control commands | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        displayed (because of "-vvvv") will be the control commands for the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        *atalla* ENGINE (ie. *not* the 'dynamic' ENGINE). You can also add | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        the "-t" switch to the utility if you want it to try and initialise | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        the atalla ENGINE for use to test any possible hardware/driver | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        issues. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2000-09-24 22:48:51 +08:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   PROBLEMS | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   ======== | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-07 14:13:40 +08:00
										 |  |  |   It seems like the ENGINE part doesn't work too well with CryptoSwift on Win32. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2001-09-05 07:18:36 +08:00
										 |  |  |   A quick test done right before the release showed that trying "openssl speed | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   -engine cswift" generated errors. If the DSO gets enabled, an attempt is made | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   to write at memory address 0x00000002. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2000-09-24 22:48:51 +08:00
										 |  |  | 
 |