On 16 June 2017 at 11:49, <sylvain.bertr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 02:06:30PM +0200, Laslo Hunhold wrote: >> On Fri, 16 Jun 2017 09:53:07 +0000 >> sylvain.bertr...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> Dear Sylvain, >> >> > openbsd is as shitty as linux and their security thingy is just >> > bullshit. >> >> are you serious? LibreSSL is proof enough that OpenBSD's approach is >> probably the sanest for a general solution. >> Not to go too OT, but the one-system-approach we find with OpenBSD is >> probably the best in the long term. I won't dare to imagine how many >> man-years have been wasted to keep the different Linux distributions up >> and running instead of concentrating the efforts into one solution. > > When people are using the word "openbsd", it does designate the kernel > project. > Not the userland projects. > > Regarding the libreSSL project, heard it's less worse than openSSL. Usually my > network crypto enabled software uses gnutls, not *SSL code. gnutls uses > "nettle" as its crypto engine. Wonder when libreSSL will split their crypto > engine from their network engine: if it's already done, what the name of their > crypto engine? > > -- > Sylvain >
http://man.openbsd.org/crypto.3
