Damien, What is the best document to use for documentation on SFTP? In other words, if I want to build an SFTP client library based on libssh.a, is there documentation about the series of messages I need to send over the wire? Thanks, ScottN -----Original Message----- From: openssh-unix-dev [mailto:openssh-unix-dev-bounces+scott_n=xypro.com@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Damien Miller Sent: Monday, January 05, 2015 3:58 PM To: grarpamp Cc: openssh-unix-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Fwd: [Cryptography] Why arenąt we using SSH for everything? All our protocol extensions are documented in PROTOCOL.* in our source. Other open-source implementations have adopted some of our extensions (e.g. OpenSSH certificates in Go's x/crypto/ssh, chacha20-poly1305 in tinyssh) and we have adopted extensions from other open-source implementations (e.g. curve25519-sha256@xxxxxxxxxx). I've kinda given up trying to write things up for the IETF. It's dominated by commerical vendors and people with more inclination to argue on mailing lists than write good software (cf. the sftp process). -d On Mon, 5 Jan 2015, grarpamp wrote: > There were a few notes in this thread that may indicate open areas for > development. I forward merely as FYI. > > http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2015-January/024231.htm > l > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Peter Gutmann <pgut001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 9:29 PM > Subject: Re: [Cryptography] Why aren?t we using SSH for everything? > To: calestyo@xxxxxxxxxxxx, pgut001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: cryptography@xxxxxxxxxxxx > > Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >On Sun, 2015-01-04 at 18:54 +1300, Peter Gutmann wrote: > >> TLS finally fixed this after a year-long battle to get the change > >> accepted. I also suggested it to the SSH folks but they weren't > >> interested, and after the fight it took to get it into TLS I just > >> didn't have the energy to go through the same thing for SSH. > > > >$ ssh -Q mac | grep etm > >hmac-sha1-etm@xxxxxxxxxxx > >hmac-sha1-96-etm@xxxxxxxxxxx > >hmac-sha2-256-etm@xxxxxxxxxxx > >hmac-sha2-512-etm@xxxxxxxxxxx > >hmac-md5-etm@xxxxxxxxxxx > >hmac-md5-96-etm@xxxxxxxxxxx > >hmac-ripemd160-etm@xxxxxxxxxxx > >umac-64-etm@xxxxxxxxxxx > >umac-128-etm@xxxxxxxxxxx > > I've done the same thing, but the problem is that a bunch of > (probably) incompatible vendor-specific extensions doesn't profit the > community as a whole. If anyone from OpenSSH would like to get in > touch, we can (a) see if what we're doing is interoperable and (b) > document it in an RFC for general adoption. > > Peter. > _______________________________________________ > The cryptography mailing list > cryptography@xxxxxxxxxxxx > http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography > _______________________________________________ > openssh-unix-dev mailing list > openssh-unix-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev > _______________________________________________ openssh-unix-dev mailing list openssh-unix-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev _______________________________________________ openssh-unix-dev mailing list openssh-unix-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev
