It is possible to switch to other crypt lib.

For example, the *mbedtls* version POC can be found at 
https://github.com/jyao1/edk2/tree/DeviceSecurity/CryptoMbedTlsPkg
The advantage is: the size is much smaller.
The disadvantage is: some required functions are not available, such as PKCS7. 

Thank you
Yao Jiewen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of James
> Bottomley
> Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 7:48 PM
> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; kra...@redhat.com; Yao, Jiewen
> <jiewen....@intel.com>
> Cc: Pawel Polawski <ppola...@redhat.com>; Li, Yi1 <yi1...@intel.com>; Oliver
> Steffen <ostef...@redhat.com>; Wang, Jian J <jian.j.w...@intel.com>; Ard
> Biesheuvel <ardb+tianoc...@kernel.org>; Jiang, Guomin
> <guomin.ji...@intel.com>; Lu, Xiaoyu1 <xiaoyu1...@intel.com>; Justen, Jordan
> L <jordan.l.jus...@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH 0/5] CryptoPkg/openssl: enable EC
> unconditionally.
> 
> On Mon, 2022-05-09 at 13:27 +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> [...]
> > > 1) Please keep the good work to enable OPENSSL3.0 in your personal
> > > branch.
> > > 2) If you have some way to control the size, then do it. If there
> > > is no much size difference by default, then you can submit to EDKII
> > > directly.
> >
> > I suspect I wouldn't get it down to 1.1.1 levels even if I find some
> > ways to make it smaller than it is in my branch today.  The code for
> > the new "provider" concept simply needs space and I think it also
> > makes LTO optimization less effective.
> 
> Having just looked into converting engine code to provider code, I
> would concur with this.  The design of providers, with their many to
> many functional mappings, seems designed to promote code bloat.
> 
> > Maybe creating our own crypto providers which include only the
> > algorithms actually needed by edk2 gets the size down a bit.
> 
> What about switching to a different crypto backend?  Since we don't
> expose any openssl APIs at all and we wrapper everything we do expose,
> it should be possible to switch to one of the non-openssl (or forked
> from openssl) variants that value size, like mbedtls or boringssl?
> 
> James
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#89612): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/89612
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/90832153/21656
Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to