Re-closing this; nobody on the team is interested. Kurt also pointed out some
concerns.
--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4075
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/o
On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 05:30:52pm +, Nich Ramsey via RT wrote:
> I said I would be willing to help, but got no reply on how best to ramp up
> on developing a stable addition likely to be accepted by the dev team.
FWIW, the necessary code has already been written (by me) for this particular
fe
> I'm still years away from having enough crypto/C programming experience,
> what in particular should I be working on?
Read the link.
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
> I'm still years away from having enough crypto/C programming experience,
> what in particular should I be working on?
Read the link.
--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4075
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsub
Ok thanks for clarifying. What does it take to become a member of the dev
team?
I'm still years away from having enough crypto/C programming experience,
what in particular should I be working on?
Basically, what kind of skills would you like to see?
Thanks again for the quick reply, I'll check o
Ok thanks for clarifying. What does it take to become a member of the dev
team?
I'm still years away from having enough crypto/C programming experience,
what in particular should I be working on?
Basically, what kind of skills would you like to see?
Thanks again for the quick reply, I'll check o
> I said I would be willing to help, but got no reply on how best to ramp up on
> developing a stable addition likely to be accepted by the dev team.
There's no hard-and-fast rules. We recently added some text:
https://openssl.org/community/getting-started.html
But again, for the specific requ
I said I would be willing to help, but got no reply on how best to ramp up
on developing a stable addition likely to be accepted by the dev team.
I read the material online about contributing, and it refers ultimately
back to this mailing list. Are there other online materials/resources I can
read
I said I would be willing to help, but got no reply on how best to ramp up
on developing a stable addition likely to be accepted by the dev team.
I read the material online about contributing, and it refers ultimately
back to this mailing list. Are there other online materials/resources I can
read
> over 40% of Alexa top 1 million TLS enabled servers enable Camellia
That's different than actual use, as you know.
> I don't see it mentioned anywhere in documentation, especially not in
> ciphers(1) man page. So, is it not so severe, or should the Camellia be
> removed from DEFAULT?
It prob
> over 40% of Alexa top 1 million TLS enabled servers enable Camellia
That's different than actual use, as you know.
> I don't see it mentioned anywhere in documentation, especially not in
> ciphers(1) man page. So, is it not so severe, or should the Camellia be
> removed from DEFAULT?
It prob
On Thursday 04 February 2016 17:10:45 Kurt Roeckx via RT wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 10:10:06AM +, Moonchild via RT wrote:
> > Really?
> >
> > That's all we get, a one-liner, no explanation, no rationale,
> > response? It's not even "brand new" functionality, Camellia as a
> > raw cipher
I'm new to implementing crypto, but this seems like a great learning
opportunity.
What's the best way for me to get ramped up through self-study? I'm
interested in the Camellia cipher, and contributing meaningful additions to
the OpenSSL library.
Moonchild: thank you for your detailed explanation
I'm new to implementing crypto, but this seems like a great learning
opportunity.
What's the best way for me to get ramped up through self-study? I'm
interested in the Camellia cipher, and contributing meaningful additions to
the OpenSSL library.
Moonchild: thank you for your detailed explanation
On 2/4/16, 12:10 , "openssl-dev on behalf of Kurt Roeckx via RT"
wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 10:10:06AM +, Moonchild via RT wrote:
>> Really?
>>
>> That's all we get, a one-liner, no explanation, no rationale, response?
>> It's not even "brand new" functionality, Camellia as a raw cipher
On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 10:10:06AM +, Moonchild via RT wrote:
> Really?
>
> That's all we get, a one-liner, no explanation, no rationale, response?
> It's not even "brand new" functionality, Camellia as a raw cipher is already
> in there, the only difference is wrapping it into GCM-based suite
On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 10:10:06AM +, Moonchild via RT wrote:
> Really?
>
> That's all we get, a one-liner, no explanation, no rationale, response?
> It's not even "brand new" functionality, Camellia as a raw cipher is already
> in there, the only difference is wrapping it into GCM-based suite
> If you see ways in which the code in proposed pull requests is
> unmaintainable, share them.
Nobody on the team is able to take the time to do it.
___
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
On Thursday 04 February 2016 13:08:15 Salz, Rich via RT wrote:
> > That's all we get, a one-liner, no explanation, no rationale,
> > response?
> Take a look at some of the discussion here:
> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/154
> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/148
You m
I missed a link: https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/320
Nobody is pressuring us. I am sure you mean that in a kind and concerned way,
and are not trying to be insulting.
If you can find someone on the openssl-dev team who is willing to take on the
work, then it could go into OpenSSL. O
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 04/02/2016 14:08, Salz, Rich via RT wrote:
>
>> That's all we get, a one-liner, no explanation, no rationale,
>> response?
>
> Take a look at some of the discussion here:
> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/374
> https://github.com/opens
> That's all we get, a one-liner, no explanation, no rationale, response?
Take a look at some of the discussion here:
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/374
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/154
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/148
I would suggest that i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 04/02/2016 11:18, Nich Ramsey via RT wrote:
> Moonchild: what advantages does Camellia have over AES? Sincerely asking
> since I'm not familiar.
It's comparable to AES in terms of how it can theoretically be broken with
algebra, as well as its p
Moonchild: what advantages does Camellia have over AES? Sincerely asking
since I'm not familiar.
OpenSSL team: I second Moonchild's curiosity, why is there no plan for
integration when the raw cipher is already present in the code base? If
it's a lack of resources you can dedicate, would you be op
Moonchild: what advantages does Camellia have over AES? Sincerely asking
since I'm not familiar.
OpenSSL team: I second Moonchild's curiosity, why is there no plan for
integration when the raw cipher is already present in the code base? If
it's a lack of resources you can dedicate, would you be op
Really?
That's all we get, a one-liner, no explanation, no rationale, response?
It's not even "brand new" functionality, Camellia as a raw cipher is already
in there, the only difference is wrapping it into GCM-based suites. Patches
are available, too.
Sounds like OpenSSL isn't as open as one mig
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Really?
That's all we get, a one-liner, no explanation, no rationale, response?
It's not even "brand new" functionality, Camellia as a raw cipher is already
in there, the only difference is wrapping it into GCM-based suites. Patches
are available, t
We're not taking on these new Camellia ciphers for now.
--
Rich Salz, OpenSSL dev team; rs...@openssl.org
___
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 11:39:56am +, Salz, Rich via RT wrote:
> Also, note that the earliest this could happen is for 1.1 (it's a new
> feature), and it's not high on our priority list for that release right now.
> Patches that are regularly rebased against master would help.
I rebase my patc
Also, note that the earliest this could happen is for 1.1 (it's a new feature),
and it's not high on our priority list for that release right now. Patches
that are regularly rebased against master would help.
___
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscri
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 08/10/2015 10:53, Alessandro Ghedini via RT wrote:
> Patches for this are available at [0], however there has been some
> resistance to adding the new TLS cipher suites to OpenSSL (see [1]), so
> the discussion has stalled.
That's really disappoi
On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 12:47:21AM +, Moonchild via RT wrote:
> Hello people,
>
> An enhancement request here for OpenSSL to add support for Camellia in GCM
> with ECC key exchange.
>
> Rationale:
> Camellia has been recognized as a modern and supported cipher by ENISA,
> NESSIE, CRYPTREC, IS
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hello people,
An enhancement request here for OpenSSL to add support for Camellia in GCM
with ECC key exchange.
Rationale:
Camellia has been recognized as a modern and supported cipher by ENISA,
NESSIE, CRYPTREC, ISO and IETF among others so should
33 matches
Mail list logo
