2010/7/20 Joerg Sonnenberger
> > That's especially galling for software where there are real security
> > considerations: suppose you find a flaw in the algorithm--you can't
> > fix it?
>
> You mean like Debian fixed the usage of uninitialized variables in
> OpenSSL? In the cryptographic communit
2010/07/19 17:41, Damien Miller wrote:
We won't add Camellia until we update OpenSSL (no point in having multiple
library version cranks), I'll take a look at it then.
OK, I will wait until OpenBSD use OpenSSL version >= 1.0.
Then I will send you and ML the updated patch again.
2010/07/20 7:26, Ted Unangst wrote:
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Yoshisato YANAGISAWA
wrote:
Not to mention there are software patent claims againt camellia. That's
a no go right there.
OpenBSD has already included Camellia source code as a part of OpenSSL. It
is disabled by default, t
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 9:06 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 09:02:35PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger
>> > Side note: the complain is also pointless because a modified algorithm
>> > wouldn't be interoperable anyway, making
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 09:02:35PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 06:37:21PM -0400, STeve Andre' wrote:
> >> On Monday 19 July 2010 18:26:15 Ted Unangst wrote:
> >> > Free software you can't modify is not free so
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 06:37:21PM -0400, STeve Andre' wrote:
>> On Monday 19 July 2010 18:26:15 Ted Unangst wrote:
>> > Free software you can't modify is not free software.
>
> Algorithm != implementation (== software).
>
>> That's espe
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 06:37:21PM -0400, STeve Andre' wrote:
> On Monday 19 July 2010 18:26:15 Ted Unangst wrote:
> > Free software you can't modify is not free software.
Algorithm != implementation (== software).
> That's especially galling for software where there are real security
> considera
> > Free software you can't modify is not free software.
>
> That's especially galling for software where there are real security
> considerations: suppose you find a flaw in the algorithm--you can't
> fix it?
This is just like Stanford and Tom Wu with their SRP patents.
It's free. Really. Jus
On Monday 19 July 2010 18:26:15 Ted Unangst wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Yoshisato YANAGISAWA
>
> wrote:
> >> Not to mention there are software patent claims againt camellia. That's
> >> a no go right there.
> >
> > OpenBSD has already included Camellia source code as a part of OpenS
> Free software you can't modify is not free software.
This is totally true. We've been here before.
Please get this situation resolved.
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Yoshisato YANAGISAWA
wrote:
>> Not to mention there are software patent claims againt camellia. That's
>> a no go right there.
>
> OpenBSD has already included Camellia source code as a part of OpenSSL. It
> is disabled by default, though.
> At the time OpenSSL i
Yoshisato YANAGISAWA wrote:
> Will you try my following patch to enable the Camellia block cipher on
> OpenSSH? The Camellia block cipher is one of the approved encryption
> method in European Union (NESSIE) and Japan (CRYPTREC) as well as has
> been specified in several Internet RFCs. It is al
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010, Yoshisato YANAGISAWA wrote:
> OpenBSD has already included Camellia source code as a part of OpenSSL. It is
> disabled by default, though.
> At the time OpenSSL included Camellia, NTT had shown following news release:
> http://www.ntt.co.jp/news/news01e/0104/010417.html
>
>
2010/7/18 Yoshisato YANAGISAWA :
> "other people use it" shows that the algorithm is well-tested.
> I know AES is also approved cipher of NESSIE. However, I see some reasons
> to believe Camellia is better than AES.
> - Full spec. Camellia 128bits, 192bits, and 256bits are not broken yet.
> Whil
2010/07/18 12:22, Ted Unangst wrote:
In general, "other people do it" is a weak justification. I don't see
any reason to believe camellia would actually be better than aes. Nessie
picked aes too, you know.
"other people use it" shows that the algorithm is well-tested.
I know AES is also approve
In general, "other people do it" is a weak justification. I don't see
any reason to believe camellia would actually be better than aes.
Nessie picked aes too, you know.
Not to mention there are software patent claims againt camellia.
That's a no go right there.
On Jul 17, 2010, at 7:12 PM
Hi all,
Will you try my following patch to enable the Camellia block cipher on
OpenSSH? The Camellia block cipher is one of the approved encryption
method in European Union (NESSIE) and Japan (CRYPTREC) as well as has
been specified in several Internet RFCs. It is also used by several OSS
projec
17 matches
Mail list logo
