Can look at it. There has been a lot of discussion, iirc, between OpenSSL and LibreSSL re: version identification. Thx for the reference. On 08-Mar-16 14:55, Hasan Diwan wrote:

On 8 March 2016 at 00:49, Michael Felt mailto:michael@felt.demon.nl> wrote:

As a relative newcomer I may have missed a long previous discussion re: linking with OpenSSL and/or LibreSSL. In an ideal world this would be rtl linking, i.e., underlying complexities of *SSL libraries are hidden from applications.

In short, when I saw this http://bugs.python.org/issue26465 Title: Upgrade OpenSSL shipped with python installers, it reminded me I need to start looking at LibreSSL again - and that, if not already done - might be something "secure" for python as well.

According to the libressl website, one of the projects primary goals is to remain "backwards-compatible with OpenSSL", which is to say, to either have code work without changes or to fail gracefully when it uses the deprecated bits. It does seem it ships with OpenBSD. There is an issue open on bugs to address whatever incompatibilities remain between LibreSSL and OpenSSL[1]. Perhaps you might want to take a look at that? -- H 1. https://bugs.python.org/issue23177

Michael _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org mailto:Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/hasan.diwan%40gmail.com

-- OpenPGP: http://hasan.d8u.us/gpg.asc Sent from my mobile device Envoyé de mon portable

Should people outside google pay attention to boringssl? The first thing it says on the website is: "Although BoringSSL is an open source project, it is not intended for general use, as OpenSSL is. We don’t recommend that third parties depend upon it. Doing so is likely to be frustrating because there are no guarantees of API or ABI stability." On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Gregory P. Smith wrote:

Don't forget BoringSSL.

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 9:30 AM Michael Felt wrote:

...

Can look at it. There has been a lot of discussion, iirc, between OpenSSL and LibreSSL re: version identification. Thx for the reference.

On 08-Mar-16 14:55, Hasan Diwan wrote:

On 8 March 2016 at 00:49, Michael Felt wrote:

...

As a relative newcomer I may have missed a long previous discussion re: linking with OpenSSL and/or LibreSSL. In an ideal world this would be rtl linking, i.e., underlying complexities of *SSL libraries are hidden from applications.

In short, when I saw this http://bugs.python.org/issue26465 Title: Upgrade OpenSSL shipped with python installers, it reminded me I need to start looking at LibreSSL again - and that, if not already done - might be something "secure" for python as well.

According to the libressl website, one of the projects primary goals is to remain "backwards-compatible with OpenSSL", which is to say, to either have code work without changes or to fail gracefully when it uses the deprecated bits. It does seem it ships with OpenBSD. There is an issue open on bugs to address whatever incompatibilities remain between LibreSSL and OpenSSL[1]. Perhaps you might want to take a look at that? -- H 1. https://bugs.python.org/issue23177

...

Michael _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/hasan.diwan%40gmail.com

-- OpenPGP: http://hasan.d8u.us/gpg.asc Sent from my mobile device Envoyé de mon portable

_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/greg%40krypto.org

_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/njs%40pobox.com

-- Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org

I have no vested interest in this, other than the continuing work we have done to make Jython compatible with OpenSSL's model, warts and all. But the fact that BoringSSL cleans up the OpenSSL API ( https://boringssl.googlesource.com/boringssl/+/HEAD/PORTING.md), at the cost of possible backwards breaking API changes looks reasonable. I suppose there is some risk - perhaps the maintainers will decide that returning 1 should mean OK, but that's not going to happen, is it. The real issue here is that no direct exposure of BoringSSL to other packages. I don't think that happens with CPython. (Ironically it happens with Jython, due to how signed jars poorly interact with shading/Java namespace remapping.) Maintaining security means dealing with the inevitable churn. Did I mention Jython's support of Python-compatible SSL? I think I did :p - Jim On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 6:06 PM, Gregory P. Smith wrote:

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 4:56 PM Nathaniel Smith wrote:

...

Should people outside google pay attention to boringssl? The first thing it says on the website is:

"Although BoringSSL is an open source project, it is not intended for general use, as OpenSSL is. We don’t recommend that third parties depend upon it. Doing so is likely to be frustrating because there are no guarantees of API or ABI stability."

Heh, good point. I guess not. :)

...

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Gregory P. Smith wrote:

...

Don't forget BoringSSL.

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 9:30 AM Michael Felt wrote:

...

Can look at it. There has been a lot of discussion, iirc, between

OpenSSL

...

and LibreSSL re: version identification. Thx for the reference.

On 08-Mar-16 14:55, Hasan Diwan wrote:

On 8 March 2016 at 00:49, Michael Felt wrote:

...

As a relative newcomer I may have missed a long previous discussion

re:

...

linking with OpenSSL and/or LibreSSL. In an ideal world this would be rtl linking, i.e., underlying complexities of *SSL libraries are hidden from applications.

In short, when I saw this http://bugs.python.org/issue26465 Title: Upgrade OpenSSL shipped with python installers, it reminded me I need to start looking at LibreSSL again - and that, if not already done - might be something "secure" for python as well.

According to the libressl website, one of the projects primary goals is to remain "backwards-compatible with OpenSSL", which is to say, to either have code work without changes or to fail gracefully when it uses the deprecated bits. It does seem it ships with OpenBSD. There is an issue open on bugs to address whatever incompatibilities remain between LibreSSL and OpenSSL[1]. Perhaps you might want to take a look at that? -- H 1. https://bugs.python.org/issue23177

...

Michael _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe:

https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/hasan.diwan%40gmail.com

-- OpenPGP: http://hasan.d8u.us/gpg.asc Sent from my mobile device Envoyé de mon portable

_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/greg%40krypto.org

_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/njs%40pobox.com

-- Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org

_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/jbaker%40zyasoft.com