Quoting: dulsi

Quoting: sergeI don't see why it wouldn't be safe to install OpenSSL, and it is probably already installed on your system but it is a newer version than the one you used to play Surviving Mars previously.

It's not that install openssl is not safe. It's that openssl 1.0 is not considered safe anymore due to bugs. Therefore the openssl developers don't want you deploying that version. Whether games use it in an unsafe way depends on the game. In most cases it is very low risk.

I don't understand why it's such a hassle to just update a game to use the latest version of the library... As is the case here (the "Steam" version of "Surviving Mars" cannot "see" the latest version of OpenSSL installed on my system).

Quoting: Cyba.Cowboy

Quoting: dulsi

Quoting: sergeI don't see why it wouldn't be safe to install OpenSSL, and it is probably already installed on your system but it is a newer version than the one you used to play Surviving Mars previously.

It's not that install openssl is not safe. It's that openssl 1.0 is not considered safe anymore due to bugs. Therefore the openssl developers don't want you deploying that version. Whether games use it in an unsafe way depends on the game. In most cases it is very low risk.

I don't understand why it's such a hassle to just update a game to use the latest version of the library... As is the case here (the "Steam" version of "Surviving Mars" cannot "see" the latest version of OpenSSL installed on my system).

It's simple: it's not lootboxes. Cases like this point it out clearly why nonfree software in general is bad.

Quoting: dvdIt's simple: it's not lootboxes. Cases like this point it out clearly why nonfree software in general is bad.

This. If it was an issue with so-called "loot boxes", it'd be fixed the next day!

Of course, that doesn't apply here - but it is the case for so many other games...

Last edited by Cyba.Cowboy on 16 May 2020 at 12:24 am UTC

Quoting: Cyba.CowboyThis. If it was an issue with so-called "loot boxes", it'd be fixed the next day!

Yes but not how you are thinking. They would package the openssl 1.0. Unless the game has new content that requires building a new binary, The code suffers bit rot. They may not know how to build a new version. When the Sinistar: Unleashed wanted to be released for free on a magazine disc, they needed to remove the copy protection. They download a crack pirates had made because they didn't have an easy way to rebuild the code. Once a game is complete, commercial games have no incentive to making sure it builds.

The same thing happens with open source as well. It's why I did a talk on Free Software Game Restoration. I was looking at the old Open Game Source articles I have. I tried three of the games. None of them built. Programs released on distros have probably been updated over time by either the maintainer of the software or the packager to keep everything working.

Quoting: dulsi

Quoting: Cyba.CowboyThis. If it was an issue with so-called "loot boxes", it'd be fixed the next day!

Yes but not how you are thinking. They would package the openssl 1.0. Unless the game has new content that requires building a new binary, The code suffers bit rot. They may not know how to build a new version. When the Sinistar: Unleashed wanted to be released for free on a magazine disc, they needed to remove the copy protection. They download a crack pirates had made because they didn't have an easy way to rebuild the code. Once a game is complete, commercial games have no incentive to making sure it builds.

I meant it exactly like that. It makes no money, they won't do it. If part/whole of the codebase would be free software, fans of the game would be able to fix such issues.

Just to update you all, Paradox Interactive (eventually) got back to me and whilst they made no promises as to when this issue would be addressed, they have opened it as an outstanding bug in their internal bug-tracking system... GOG.com on the other hand, basically threw their hands up and went "not our problem".