[14431] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Monoculture
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Guus Sliepen)
Thu Oct 2 15:28:33 2003
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 18:09:55 +0200
From: Guus Sliepen <guus@sliepen.eu.org>
To: Jill Ramonsky <Jill.Ramonsky@aculab.com>
Cc: cryptography@metzdowd.com
In-Reply-To: <3F7C2659.1090107@aculab.com>
--CPn8Wy5ME997YUMW
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:21:29PM +0100, Jill Ramonsky wrote:
> Thanks everyone for the SSL encouragement. I'm going to have a quick=20
> re-read of Eric's book over the weekend and then start thinking about=20
> what sort of "easy to use" implementation I could do. I was thinking of=
=20
> doing a C++ implentation with classes and templates and stuff. (By=20
> contrast OpenSSL is a C implementation). Anyone got any thoughts on=20
> that?
Writing a C++ library almost certainly means your application has to be
written in C++ as well. I think it is easier to create a C++ wrapper for
a C library than a C wrapper for a C++ library (especially if you use
all the OO features, although nothing prevents you from following the OO
paradigm in C). Because of that, I think you reach more application
builders with a C library.
> Also - anyone thinking of using something like this - could you=20
> post (in another thread maybe) suggestions as to what kind of "simple"=20
> interface you actually want? As in, what you want it to do?
As a programmer I'd like to see something that allows you to:
a) specify credentials
b) do TLS_start()
c) have a TLS_read() and TLS_write() function which work EXACTLY the
same as the read() and write() functions
d) TLS_stop()
Each of those steps can return a fatal error, but I'd rather not have to
deal with warnings and other stuff that needs intervention of the
application itself, and I also don't want to write callback functions if
it's not really necessary.
> Some advice on licensing wouldn't go amiss either. (GPL? ... LGPL? ...
> something else?)
I'd say LGPL or BSD, without any funny clauses.
By the way, also have a look at GnuTLS and libgcrypt:
- http://www.gnu.org/software/gnutls/
- http://www.g10code.com/p-libgcrypt.html=20
--=20
Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
Guus Sliepen <guus@sliepen.eu.org>
--CPn8Wy5ME997YUMW
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/fE3SAxLow12M2nsRAvV3AJ94L85tG/Zl4o4veZO702A0HMXJ7QCfeYvG
6PYV4ZlmF8cvyIJ488cJ2Bw=
=p+rI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--CPn8Wy5ME997YUMW--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
