This is something that theoretically can be done, but no. It would be painfully slow. Better to offload this to a dedicated chip or fpga due to the math. OpenSSL is a mess already. There are enough Arm based systems that can run it.
On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 9:03 AM Howard Pepper <[email protected]> wrote: > I think you would be hard pressed to keep even one certificate trust > chain (root, CA signer certificate, client certificate) on the M100, let > alone the SSL libraries to actually use it. Bear in mind that different > sites use different trust chains from different certificate providers, > and you can see where this is heading. Also, the SSL handshake takes > quite a bit of CPU horse power. The lowly 8085 in the M100 wouldn't > stand a chance. > > Howard > > On 04/09/2016 08:21 AM, Hiraghm wrote: > > I've wanted to use my M100 as a twitter client for a long time. > > Twitter, facebook, wikipedia, lots of places on the web require SSL. > > I've also wanted to make my DOS desktop computer my main desktop > > computer for day-to-day stuff. > > So, in my search for SSL for Arachne I came across Lynx for DOS, which > > used OpenSSL. OpenSLL is written in Posix complaint C (so it says). > > > > I imagine it'd be very hard to port to 8085 assembler; but then I've > > been wanting to port Small-C to the M100 for a long time, too. I've > > got the source code and everything, I just need to find the time. > > > > The question is... would an M100 be powerful enough to implement SSL > > in a timely enough fashion to make the machine useful as a twitter > > client? I suppose if OpenSSL can be ported to the M100, a Lynx client > > could be written for it, as well as an email client. Maybe an > > Arachne-like multi-app web client? > > > > If I were to get Small-C ported to the M100, does anyone feel they > > would be more encouraged to develop stuff for the M100? Is anyone > > other than me even interested in trying to make it so they could > > access things like twitter from their M100? > > > > > >
