On Wed, 17 May 2000, Mark Blackman wrote:
> speaking of which, I presume that OpenSSH 2.1 is being
> merged into Internat by kindly overworked developer types
> at the moment?
I think Peter Wemm has already finished.
Kris
In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate.
On Wed, 17 May 2000, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> OK, if OpenSSL still contains crypto then "never mind"; I thought
> OpenSSL used *only* RSA and it used it through the RSAstubs code,
> making it "OK."
OpenSSL is a general-purpose cryptography toolkit which includes such
goodies as Blowfish, CAST,
speaking of which, I presume that OpenSSH 2.1 is being
merged into Internat by kindly overworked developer types
at the moment?
On Tue, May 16, 2000 at 10:06:09AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
> Even so, moving SSH into the bindist would be one less thing that has to
> be merged into Internat all
> But I'm suddenly confused what you're actually talking about
> here: OpenSSH, OpenSSL, or RSAREF.
>
> OpenSSH has never included crypto code, but it's useless without OpenSSL
> which quite certainly does. OpenSSH no longer requires RSAREF to operate
> (if you've got clients/servers willing to d
On Mon, 15 May 2000, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> > Err, well it still requires openssl, which I think is firmly rooted in the
> > crypto distribution as long as we have one.
>
> Is it? I thought the RSAref code being pluggable gave it some
> protection, or is merely "pluggability" also classifie
On Mon, May 15, 2000 at 09:54:52PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> Err, well it still requires openssl, which I think is firmly rooted in the
> crypto distribution as long as we have one.
Even so, moving SSH into the bindist would be one less thing that has to
be merged into Internat all the time.
> Err, well it still requires openssl, which I think is firmly rooted in the
> crypto distribution as long as we have one.
Is it? I thought the RSAref code being pluggable gave it some
protection, or is merely "pluggability" also classified as crypto?
I do recall someone saying something to tha
On Mon, 15 May 2000, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> I wonder if we even have to have it be part of the crypto distribution
> in such an event. I always thought it would have been nice if it
> could have come with the bindist, and if it doesn't have any "crypto"
> dependencies or bits which explicitl
> * No longer a dependency on RSA (and therefore rsaref for US folks): SSH2
> can handle DSA keys which have no patent or usage restrictions. This means
> we could now enable SSH2 out of the box in a crypto installation, with no
> post-installation configuration requirements. We now have a truly f
At 10:52 PM -0700 5/14/00, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>* No longer a dependency on RSA (and therefore rsaref for US folks):
> SSH2 can handle DSA keys which have no patent or usage restrictions.
> This means we could now enable SSH2 out of the box in a crypto
> installation, with no post-installation
On Sun, 14 May 2000 22:52:11 MST, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> * Kerberos support is also limited to SSH1.
Presumably this is still Heimdal Kerberos support, without MIT
interoperability?
Ciao,
Sheldon.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body
11 matches
Mail list logo
