Re: About BoringSSL, an OpenSSL fork - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Geoff Winkless
Subject Re: About BoringSSL, an OpenSSL fork
Date
Msg-id CAEzk6ffo=EszuMpPiYXpjbRK4ugEdEHaS4-A3abcdink_EWy+w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread
In response to About BoringSSL, an OpenSSL fork  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 26 October 2015 at 00:59, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
https://boringssl.googlesource.com/boringssl/+/HEAD/PORTING.md
Looking at the porting section many routines have changed compared to
OpenSSL. I can't imagine this fork to become a complete replacement of
OpenSSL, but it may be worth considering an integration in Postgres
code depending on the features it will have (Curve25519,
Ed25519 mentioned). Also since 9.4 the SSL code paths have been
rearranged to allow more implementations to be done with other SSL
libraries.

​​
​Quote:

Although BoringSSL is an open source project, it is not intended for general use, as OpenSSL is. We don’t recommend that third parties depend upon it. Doing so is likely to be frustrating because there are no guarantees of API or ABI stability.

​Sounds like a subscription to a world of pain.​

​Geoff​

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] GSSAPI encryption support
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: questions about PG update performance