On 10/27/2017 09:46, John Hein wrote: > What's the overhaul goal here? There's basic crypto libraries with > symmetric & assymmetric crypto & hashing (e.g., NaCL, libsodium, > openssl's libcrypto). There's libraries that add support for SSL/TLS > & X.509 certificates and such. There's stuff to support using > crypto hardware (accelerators, secure crypto token storage devices). > > And is the thought to [eventually] replace openssl in base with > something lighter perhaps? > > I assume we're looking for bsd, isc, mit, etc., style licenses only. >
Sorry for being slow to reply. There's a couple of goals that seem to be in common here (and which I've seen reflected in the comments to my original posting. * Dissatisfaction with the OpenSSL codebase and its history of vulnerabilities. * Desire to consolidate the crypto implementations, specifically, for a crypto library that can serve userland, kernel, and bootloaders. * In my case, the trust framework stuff I wrote about requires public-key crypto in the kernel and loader, which isn't something the kernel crypto framework can do. * It's also harder to add new ciphers when there's multiple crypto codebases. _______________________________________________ freebsd-security@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-security-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
