[openssl-dev] Fwd: Re: [openssl-users] Removing obsolete crypto from OpenSSL 1.1 - seeking feedback

Viktor Dukhovni openssl-users at dukhovni.org
Tue Nov 17 00:01:09 UTC 2015


On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 11:23:52PM +0000, Matt Caswell wrote:

> Disabling algorithms isn't the right answer IMO. I do like the idea of a
> "liblegacycrypto". That way people that only have need of current
> up-to-date crypto can stick with the main library. Others who need the
> older crypto can still get at it. Yes, that means we still have to
> maintain this code - but I don't see it as that big a burden.

What becomes a bit tricky is having an EVP interface that can find
the algorithms in liblegacrypto.  This I think means two different
builds of the crypto library, one that depends on liblegacycrypto
and provides its algorithms, and another than does not.

Systems might then ship with:

	libcrypto-legacy.so	- Just the legacy algorithms

	libcrypto-compat.so	- Libcrypto that supports the above
	libcrypto-secure.so	- Libcrypto with just the strong algos

	libcrypto.so		- Symlink to one of the two above

Some applications might be linked directly to "-secure" or "-compat"
to make sure they get one or the other.  This is a bunch of work.

At this time, with the resources at our disposal, I think it makes
more sense to take a more gradual approach and just drop the assembly
support.


> Being the "swiss army knife" is no bad thing (even where that includes
> old crypto). We just have to find a way to separate the two concerns:
> current crypto (and only current crypto) for most (and probably most
> importantly for libssl users); broader crypto support for those that
> want it (which is why I like the liblegacycrypto idea because it enables
> us to do that).

I like the idea, but don't see a manageable implementation...

> Whether this is the right thing to do in the 1.1.0 timeframe is another
> consideration though. Viktor's arguments are quite convincing.

The timeline is a concern.  We're fairly far into the 1.1.0
development cycle (alphas and betas soon), and this is a major
change.  I think major changes like removing the ciphers or a whole
new optional library should wait for a better opportunity.

-- 
	Viktor.


More information about the openssl-dev mailing list