Hi Damien and openSSH team, We were able to discuss your suggestions today in our team meeting. We are eager to work with openSSH on this. We will be making efforts on this project going forward. Are there any other suggestions from your side before we start? Kind Regards, wolfSSL Team and Kaleb Kaleb Himes www.wolfssl.com kaleb@xxxxxxxxxxx Skype: kaleb.himes +1 406 381 9556 On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 9:12 PM, Damien Miller <djm@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 1 Sep 2015, Kaleb Himes wrote: > > > Hi openSSH, > > > > After having time to review our licensing model and perhaps play around > > with our product we were checking back to see what your thoughts might > be. > > > > We also wanted to point out that we only desire to give end-users an > > alternative option to compiling with openSSL. > > End users who configure with the "--enable-wolfssl" option would need to > > consider licensing. > > That would be a part of their project evaluation phase. Any patch we > submit > > to you would retain your licensing model. > > Hi, > > I'm not opposed to making OpenSSH play nicer with non-OpenSSL crypto > libraries, but I am worried that attempts to do so could yield a worse > #ifdef maze than we already have. > > Microsoft will need to figure out how to handle crypto in their port > of OpenSSH since they'll likely be using CryptoAPI instead of OpenSSL, > so perhaps there is an opportunity to find some nice way of abstracting > out all the BIGNUM, RSA, DSA, EC*, etc out that suits you both (and > cleans up core OpenSSH along the way). > > -d > > _______________________________________________ openssh-unix-dev mailing list openssh-unix-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev
