Am 19.08.2008 um 14:20 schrieb Eric Rescorla

And of course, this library will be totally perfect, not need any maintenance,
etc.

It's a *huge* difference if someone who doesn't have an idea about crypto tries to implement it using OpenSSL in some Jabber client or if they use a library that is ready to use, written by some people who know much about cryptography. It's like you tell a database programmer who never did anything with graphics to write a 3D engine.

I'm certainly sensitive to the complaint that libraries like OpenSSL
give the programmer
too much freedom, but that seems to me to be primarily an issue of providing an
appropriate wrapper API. I don't see that that motivates designing an
entirely new
protocol which must then be maintained, and also requires a new implementation that must itself be maintained. This has proven to be a significant amount of work for all the COMSEC protocols of which I am aware, and given that XSF's expertise isn't primarily in COMSEC, I don't see any reason to expect that its
experience would be different.

Sure, we could have something like libxmpptls.

--
Jonathan

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to