Adding standalone RSA code

[Peter Pentchev]

On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 05:55:05PM +0000, Mark Murray wrote:
> Colin Percival writes:
> >  > Is size really a concern?
> > 
> > No.  The size is a side-effect of having a minimal, highly secure,
> > library, and was not a design consideration.
> 
> "New" very often means "Insecure". I'd rather see something with lots 
> of eyes over it, and OpenSSL has the advantage of having quite a few 
> competent crypto guys grovel through it.
> 
> I'm still inclined to say "Please stick with OpenSSL; it is the devil 
> we know."

And then, of course, there's the problem that OpenSSL doesn't work
RIGHT NOW in some situations; see my two e-mails to -hackers and
others (including you ;) at

http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/htdig/freebsd-hackers/2004-September/008089.html
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/htdig/freebsd-hackers/2004-September/008090.html

Yep, "the devil we know", indeed :)

G'luck,
Peter

-- 
Peter Pentchev	roam at ringlet.net    roam at cnsys.bg    roam at FreeBSD.org
PGP key:	http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc
Key fingerprint	FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E  DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553
.siht ekil ti gnidaer eb d'uoy ,werbeH ni erew ecnetnes siht fI
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/attachments/20041213/4dd0ad5f/attachment.bin