Leaderboard

OK that makes more sense to me now. Thanks for clarifying. BTW, I checked out some OpenSSL binaries on the Web, and every build of version 1.1.1b I found had a dependency on bcrypt.dll - even the ones billed as "XP compatible." So I suspect those are typically built on Win 7, 8.1, or 10, and the builders are unaware they need to override the definition of WIN32_WINNT to 0x0501 when compiling if they want to retain XP compatibility. Builds of 1.0.2 and 1.1.0 were generally OK. But those versions are only supported until later this year. We need to see if someone here (maybe @CoRoNe or @roytam1) can rebuild OpenSSL v1.1.1b correctly for XP.

I apologize for not being clear. Personally, I only have Win XP, but as far as I understood, @heinoganda successfully tested the latest Cryptography up to 2.6.1 under Win 7 with Python 3.4. In theory, in newer versions of Python (3.5, 3.6 and 3.7) there should also be no problems under Win 7. I just meant that. IMHO, we already have OpenSSL with XP support in the form of libcrypto-1_1.dll and libssl-1_1.dll files. Unfortunately, I still can not figure out how to build *. pyd files for Python. Cryptohraphy package is not well documented for this case.

I didn't. @WildBill is/was a very careful and thorough reverser, who took for himself the mission of porting to 2k all the patches MS was (and remains) denying it. He studied carefully each pach until he fully understood it, then made the port. His ports are safer even than MS's originals. He went even further and reversed kernell32.dll to the point he had a working compilable source he then made public, thus providing a precious source of information regarding what he found out about kernell32.dll to anyone carefull enough to read and meditate about his soure code. And also gave people his free PE tool. But you're wrong about one detail: @blackwingcat had been extending the 2k kernel some time before @WildBill began to release his own work, and IIRR, the 1st ever to extend the 2k kernel was @OldCigarette (whom, I'm sad to say, I'm even surer isn't among us anymore).

KB2589339: I would've thought M$ could have taken care of the new Japanese era with a single update, rather than dribbling out half a dozen or so

Some of our members (with all due respect) indulge in the latest version fetish (LVF), which can be mostly harmless when not taken to extremes. I, myself, do indulge in it sometimes, I reckon, but the farthest I usually go is to change the minimum "Subsystem Version" to allow executables to run, nowadays. If I really have something that only runs on Win 7+, I either do it on 7SP1 or eschew it, usually the latter. As of today, all that I need to do in my day-to-day can be done in XP SP3. I consider the Extended Kernel approach mostly useless, although I dedicate lots of respect to @Xeno86, @jumper, and @blackwingcat. I consider the WDMSYS/WDMEX (Extended Driver Interface) very useful, but nobody has been ever able to port to the NT-family OSes what Walter Oney and @rloew ( ) did for 9x/ME... and that's why we still haven't working Intel USB 3.0 drivers at this point in time. Of course, these are just my 2¢ and everybody may disagree. Moreover, YMMV, obviously. But, considering @Thomas S. did ask the queestion above, I felt it shouldn't remain unanswered. That's all. Sage words and attitude, IMO. +1 It depends, IMO: people I know (even if just through the internet) and trust I don't consider foreign sources. Otherwise I do agree to that, too.

Hi. Now 2.9f and 2.9g (perlhaps test version 2.9h, too) have critical problems. * Certain security softwares collide with extended kernel. (It is almost resolved) * Chromium and Firefox based web browser will freeze. Regrettably I don't release English version untill fixed them. You may believe that Japanese only version is Beta Test :3 It may be released in March. You know the following article comes for correction problem reasons http://blog.livedoor.jp/blackwingcat/archives/1979072.html