10 May 2001 21:55:58 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andreas J. Koenig) wrote:
>
> I like it. (Disclaimer: I'm no crypto expert.) Have you seen
>
> Crypt::OpenSSL::BN (Contact Author Ian Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
> Crypt::OpenSSL::RSA (I/IR/IROBERTS/Crypt-OpenSSL-RSA-0.11.tar.gz)
> Crypt::OpenSSL::Random (I/IR/IROBERTS/Crypt-OpenSSL-Random-0.02.tar.gz)
> OpenCA::OpenSSL (M/MA/MADWOLF/OpenCA-OpenSSL-0.6.3a.tar.gz)
>
No, I just had a look at Crypt::OpenSSL::BN, and as I needed a quick implementation
and it didn't fit my needs at first sight, I just reimplemented it my way :)
>
> A shorter name would be worthwhile for such a huge project.
> Crypt::OpenSSL seems the natural choice and IROBERTS didn't bother
> with a license term on a name. I don't know, but Crypto::LibCrypto
> somehow sucks too much. Maybe Crypt::LibSSL?
The problem is _not_ with IROBERTS, but with OpenSSL itself, as from the OpenSSL
LICENSE file you read :
* 5. Products derived from this software may not be called "OpenSSL"
* nor may "OpenSSL" appear in their names without prior written
* permission of the OpenSSL Project.
so if IROBERTS and MADWOLF had permission it's OK, otherwise the name is illegal.
And LibCrypto is really what I meant, as it is the core library implementing
crypto stuff, although libssl really implements SSL/TLS layers...
> Please coordinate with IROBERTS.
Sure, of course you're right, as his goal seems quite close to mine ! I will ASAP.
Thanks for your time, Andreas,
François
