I think this is a duplicate.
We're still not implementing Camellia-GCM :)
--
Rich Salz, OpenSSL dev team; rs...@openssl.org
___
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
On Tuesday 25 August 2015 08:58:57 Hanno Böck wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 22:32:24 +0200
>
> Hubert Kario wrote:
> > > After all the whole
> > > heartbleed story can largely be explained by that. I'd propose that
> > > OpenSSL doesn't add any new features without a clear explanation
> > > what a
On Tuesday 25 August 2015 08:58:57 Hanno Böck wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 22:32:24 +0200
>
> Hubert Kario wrote:
> > > After all the whole
> > > heartbleed story can largely be explained by that. I'd propose that
> > > OpenSSL doesn't add any new features without a clear explanation
> > > what a
On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 22:32:24 +0200
Hubert Kario wrote:
> > After all the whole
> > heartbleed story can largely be explained by that. I'd propose that
> > OpenSSL doesn't add any new features without a clear explanation
> > what advantage they bring in which situation - and who is likely
> > goin
On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 22:32:24 +0200
Hubert Kario wrote:
> > After all the whole
> > heartbleed story can largely be explained by that. I'd propose that
> > OpenSSL doesn't add any new features without a clear explanation
> > what advantage they bring in which situation - and who is likely
> > goin
On Monday 24 August 2015 19:25:24 Hanno Böck wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 10:21:42 +
>
> Alessandro Ghedini via RT wrote:
> > Which adds support for Camellia GCM and adds the correspondent TLS
> > cipher suites. Most of the code comes from the AES GCM
> > implementation, so maybe there's an o
On Monday 24 August 2015 19:25:24 Hanno Böck wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 10:21:42 +
>
> Alessandro Ghedini via RT wrote:
> > Which adds support for Camellia GCM and adds the correspondent TLS
> > cipher suites. Most of the code comes from the AES GCM
> > implementation, so maybe there's an o
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 05:41:19PM +, Salz, Rich via RT wrote:
> > Does camellia offer any significant advantage in
> > any situation that would justify increasing support?
>
> Yes, I'd like to know who needs it.
>
> GOST is going to move to an externally-maintained ENGINE (thanks, Dimitry:)
> May I ask one question: Why?
Excellent question. "Because there is an RFC" is not a good enough reason any
more, I think.
> Does camellia offer any significant advantage in
> any situation that would justify increasing support?
Yes, I'd like to know who needs it.
GOST is going to move to a
On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 10:21:42 +
Alessandro Ghedini via RT wrote:
> Which adds support for Camellia GCM and adds the correspondent TLS
> cipher suites. Most of the code comes from the AES GCM
> implementation, so maybe there's an opportunity for some refactoring
> there.
May I ask one question
On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 10:21:42 +
Alessandro Ghedini via RT wrote:
> Which adds support for Camellia GCM and adds the correspondent TLS
> cipher suites. Most of the code comes from the AES GCM
> implementation, so maybe there's an opportunity for some refactoring
> there.
May I ask one question
On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 01:17:36PM +, Stephen Henson via RT wrote:
> On Sat Aug 22 10:21:42 2015, alessan...@ghedini.me wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > see GitHub pull request at
> > https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/374
> >
> > Which adds support for Camellia GCM and adds the correspondent TLS
On Sat Aug 22 10:21:42 2015, alessan...@ghedini.me wrote:
> Hello,
>
> see GitHub pull request at
> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/374
>
> Which adds support for Camellia GCM and adds the correspondent TLS cipher
> suites. Most of the code comes from the AES GCM implementation, so maybe
>
Hello,
see GitHub pull request at
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/374
Which adds support for Camellia GCM and adds the correspondent TLS cipher
suites. Most of the code comes from the AES GCM implementation, so maybe
there's an opportunity for some refactoring there.
This fixes issue #32
14 matches
Mail list logo