Re: [dev] Suckless remote shell?

From: FRIGN <>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2013 11:07:01 +0100

On Sun, 3 Nov 2013 19:54:41 +0800
Chris Down <> wrote:

> Cryptography is a niche. Let the cryptographers do their business, I am
> not knowledgeable enough to say what sucks and does not suck in that
> arena (other than saying that OpenSSL is one of the worst pieces of shit
> I have ever had to deal with, but that's a comment on their design, not
> their cryptography. I have heard their code is equally as crappy -- it
> certainly looks that way, but I will leave that to those more
> knowledgeable in that area to decide).

I must confess: OpenSSL's bloat always kept me from studying the cryptography behind it.
I could imagine a fork/rewrite based on OpenSSL's crypto-code, called "s3l" ("suckless ssl"), but see the implicated problems with it.
You can't just rewrite software without having at least one real specialist to check the code.
Looking at OpenSSL, it has undergone dozens of thorough checks by leading specialists in this area.
This, however, doesn't change the fact it sucks.



Received on Sun Nov 03 2013 - 11:07:01 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sun Nov 03 2013 - 13:12:05 CET