Stephan Verbücheln schrieb:
> As far as I understand it, the main point of BabaSSL is to add support
> for Chinese developed ciphers and algorithms.
One alternative would be to ship those ciphers as a module for OpenSSL,
this already happens with the Russian GOST ciphers via the
On 6/30/22 16:16, Sam Hartman wrote:
However there are some other features from the ITP:
-Support NTLS (formal GM dual-certificate protocol) handshake processing,
according to GB/T 38636-2020
TLCP
-QUIC API support
Is it compatible with QuicTLS, which is another fork of OpenSSL?
> "Stephan" == Stephan Verbücheln writes:
Stephan> As far as I understand it, the main point of BabaSSL is to
Stephan> add support for Chinese developed ciphers and algorithms.
It looked like there were two main points.
The first was in fact these ciphers.
I don't think that's a
On Jun 30, Stephan Verbücheln wrote:
> As far as I understand it, the main point of BabaSSL is to add support
> for Chinese developed ciphers and algorithms.
Is supporting Chinese cryptography standards a goal for Debian?
If it is then they should be available to all packages, but if it is not
As far as I understand it, the main point of BabaSSL is to add support
for Chinese developed ciphers and algorithms.
Long time ago in my student years, I was working with a German fork of
OpenSSL. The point was to add German elliptic curves (BSI and Deutsche
Telekom). They were eventually merged
On Jun 22, Lance Lin wrote:
> Yes, from my understanding it is a "drop in" replacement for OpenSSL. One of
> my packages (Workflow) uses it but can also use OpenSSL.
>
> I think this package will be beneficial to the Workflow users and downstream
> OS's.
Can you explain exactly what benefits
On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 01:43:25PM +, Lance Lin wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Thank you for your input and guidance. I've only been in Debian for a year so
>
> I still have many things to learn. I assumed there would be issues with
> library
> name conflicts and wanted to get the group's
Hello everyone,
Thank you for your input and guidance. I've only been in Debian for a year so
I still have many things to learn. I assumed there would be issues with library
name conflicts and wanted to get the group's opinion.
>> Or if the goal is rather to experiment and expose BabaSSL to
Hi,
On 22-06-2022 20:04, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
Or if the goal is rather to experiment and expose BabaSSL to the many archs
we have in Debian, then keep it in unstable only by filing a bug to block
it from testing.
Or better: experimental, to avoid packages starting to (build-)depend on it.
Am Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 02:28:36PM + schrieb Lance Lin:
> Hello Marco,
>
> > What is the plan? Are there any current or new packages which will
> > depend on it?
>
> Yes, from my understanding it is a "drop in" replacement for OpenSSL. One of
> my packages (Workflow) uses it but can also
Hello Marco,
> What is the plan? Are there any current or new packages which will
> depend on it?
Yes, from my understanding it is a "drop in" replacement for OpenSSL. One of my
packages (Workflow) uses it but can also use OpenSSL.
I think this package will be beneficial to the Workflow
On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 02:21:43PM +, Lance Lin wrote:
> > AFAIK this library is forked from OpenSSL with some extensive
> > modifications to support new crypto technologies, do you think we need
> > to involve the Security Team to review whether this package can be
> > supported during the
Hello Aron,
Thank you for your email.
> AFAIK this library is forked from OpenSSL with some extensive
> modifications to support new crypto technologies, do you think we need
> to involve the Security Team to review whether this package can be
> supported during the next stable release cycle?
>
13 matches
Mail list logo
