Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Sunday May 18 2014, @05:44AM   Printer-friendly
from the got-your-acronyms-here dept.

Bob Beck who is an OpenBSD, OpenSSH, and LibreSSL developer as well as the director of Alberta-based non-profit OpenBSD Foundation gave a talk earlier today at BSDCan 2014 in Ottawa, discussing and illustrating the OpenSSL problems that have led to the creation of a big fork of OpenSSL that is still API-compatible with the original, providing a drop-in replacement, without the #ifdef spaghetti and without its own "OpenSSL C" dialect.

Bob is claiming that the Maryland-incorporated OpenSSL Foundation is nothing but a for-profit front for FIPS consulting gigs, and that noone at OpenSSL is actually interested in maintaining OpenSSL, but merely adding more and more features, with the existing bugs rotting in bug-tracking for a staggering 4 years (CVE-2010-5298 has been independently re-discovered by the OpenBSD team after having been quietly reported in OpenSSL's RT some 4 years prior).

Bob reports that the bug-tracking system abandoned by OpenSSL has actually been very useful to the OpenBSD developers at finding and fixing even more of OpenSSL bugs in downstream LibreSSL, which still remain unfixed in upstream OpenSSL.

It is revealed that a lot of crude cleaning has already been completed, and the process is still ongoing, but some new ciphers already saw their addition to LibreSSL RFC 5639 EC Brainpool, ChaCha20, Poly1305, FRP256v1, and some derivatives based on the above, like ChaCha20-Poly1305 AEAD EVP from Adam Langley's Chromium OpenSSL patchset.

To conclude, Bob warns against portable LibreSSL knockoffs, and asks the community for Funding Commitment -- the Linux Foundation is turning a blind eye to LibreSSL, and instead is only committed to funding OpenSSL directly, despite the apparent lack of security-oriented direction within the OpenSSL project upstream. Funding can be directed to the OpenBSD Foundation.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 18 2014, @02:06PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 18 2014, @02:06PM (#44866)

    I'd say 25-40k$ so far for using comic sans with the donation hint was well worth it. But go on complaining please

  • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Sunday May 18 2014, @03:34PM

    by maxwell demon (1608) on Sunday May 18 2014, @03:34PM (#44890) Journal

    You have any indication that this amount of money was spent because of Comic Sans?

    For all we know, it might as well have been ten times as much if they hadn't used Comic Sans. Unfortunately we don't have access to an alternative reality to compare the numbers.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.