[Python-Dev] LibreSSL support
njs at pobox.com
Thu Jan 18 19:09:28 EST 2018
On Jan 18, 2018 07:34, "Christian Heimes" <christian at python.org> wrote:
On 2018-01-16 21:17, Christian Heimes wrote:
> FYI, master on Travis CI now builds and uses OpenSSL 1.1.0g . I have
> created a daily cronjob to populate Travis' cache with OpenSSL builds.
> Until the cache is filled, Linux CI will take an extra 5 minute.
I have messed up my initial research. :( When I was checking LibreSSL
and OpenSSL for features, I draw a wrong conclusion. LibreSSL is *not*
OpenSSL 1.0.2 compatible. It only implements some of the required
features from 1.0.2 (e.g. X509_check_hostname) but not
X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set1_host() is required to perform hostname
verification during the TLS handshake. Without the function, I'm unable
to fix Python's hostname matching code . LibreSSL upstream knows
about the issue since 2016 . I have opened another bug report .
We have two options until LibreSSL has addressed the issue:
1) Make the SSL module more secure, simpler and standard conform
2) Support LibreSSL
There are tons of different SSL libraries out there that we could
theoretically support, but don't. IIUC, the reasons we started supporting
LibreSSL in the first place were:
- it claimed to be OpenSSL compatible, so supporting it is supposed to be
- when it started (just after heartbleed), there was a lot of uncertainty
about whether OpenSSL would remain a viable option, and LibreSSL looked
like it might become the new de facto standard.
Now it's a few years later, and things have turned out differently: they
aren't compatible in practice, and OpenSSL has turned things around so that
it's clearly ahead of LibreSSL technically (cleaner API, new features like
TLS 1.3, ...), and in terms of developer momentum.
We have *very* few people qualified to maintain the ssl module, so given
the new landscape I think we should focus on keeping our core OpenSSL
support solid and not worry about LibreSSL. If LibreSSL wants to be
supported as well then – like any other 2nd tier platform – they need to
find someone to do the work. And if people are worried about supporting
more diversity in SSL implementations, then PEP 543 is probably the thing
to focus on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-Dev