• Kris (2/2) Jun 28 2004 Has anyone had experience working with OpenSSL ?
• Regan Heath (7/8) Jun 28 2004 Using it, or writing it?
• Arcane Jill (19/21) Jun 28 2004 Yes.
• Kris (13/38) Jun 29 2004 TLSD would be a psychedelic name

"Kris" <someidiot earthlink.dot.dot.dot.net> writes:

Has anyone had experience working with OpenSSL ?

- Kris

Regan Heath <regan netwin.co.nz> writes:

On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 19:08:46 -0700, Kris 
<someidiot earthlink.dot.dot.dot.net> wrote:

 Has anyone had experience working with OpenSSL ?

Using it, or writing it?

I have used it, i.e. added SSL support to my socket code.

Regan.

-- 
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

Arcane Jill <Arcane_member pathlink.com> writes:

In article <cbqirm$2tl2$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Kris says...
Has anyone had experience working with OpenSSL ?

- Kris

Yes.

There was much discussion of OpenSSL on the cryptography mailing list a while
back. General opinion there is that it was just too damn hard to use for most
people to get to grips with. The general feeling was that what was needed
alongside it was an "easy-to-use" SSL toolkit. At that stage, I volunteered to
write one. It was going to be called TLS++.

But then things changed, because I discovered D. And I discovered that D is more
productive than C++. (I can write code in D faster than I can write code in
C++). So now, I'm writing said toolkit in D. (And I'll have to think up a new
name for it).

It's slow work. So far, I've written big integers, and I'm partway through
random number stuff. Others have supplied hash algorithms. It's basically a
year-long project, at least. Unfortunately, it's not finished yet.

Which brings us back to OpenSSL, of course. OpenSSL is not even C++, it's just
C, so no destructors and you have to manage everything. Me? I gave up and
decided to write something better. But it DOES work, if you can get the hang of
it.

Arcane Jill

"Kris" <someidiot earthlink.dot.dot.dot.net> writes:

Thank you ~ that's helpful AJ.

So now, I'm writing said toolkit in D. (And I'll have to think up
 a new name for it).

TLSD would be a psychedelic name <g>



"Arcane Jill" <Arcane_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:cbr40l$m66$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 In article <cbqirm$2tl2$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Kris says...
Has anyone had experience working with OpenSSL ?

- Kris

 Yes.

 There was much discussion of OpenSSL on the cryptography mailing list a

while
 back. General opinion there is that it was just too damn hard to use for

most
 people to get to grips with. The general feeling was that what was needed
 alongside it was an "easy-to-use" SSL toolkit. At that stage, I

volunteered to
 write one. It was going to be called TLS++.

 But then things changed, because I discovered D. And I discovered that D

is more
 productive than C++. (I can write code in D faster than I can write code

in
 C++). So now, I'm writing said toolkit in D. (And I'll have to think up a

new
 name for it).

 It's slow work. So far, I've written big integers, and I'm partway through
 random number stuff. Others have supplied hash algorithms. It's basically

a
 year-long project, at least. Unfortunately, it's not finished yet.

 Which brings us back to OpenSSL, of course. OpenSSL is not even C++, it's

just
 C, so no destructors and you have to manage everything. Me? I gave up and
 decided to write something better. But it DOES work, if you can get the

hang of
 it.

 Arcane Jill