Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 10:24:40 -0500 From: Allan Jude <allanjude@freebsd.org> To: Ed Schouten <ed@nuxi.nl> Cc: src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r313329 - in head: bin/ed secure/usr.bin secure/usr.bin/bdes usr.bin usr.bin/enigma Message-ID: <f6254f52-846c-2be6-b37e-8acf68445a02@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <CABh_MKn=20289jkYHikaqnFd%2BQbV-nvBOP=khiB6jeKcbiLAAQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <201702060827.v168RJQY056084@repo.freebsd.org> <CABh_MKn=20289jkYHikaqnFd%2BQbV-nvBOP=khiB6jeKcbiLAAQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/06/17 10:18 AM, Ed Schouten wrote:
> Hi Allan,
>
> 2017-02-06 9:27 GMT+01:00 Allan Jude <allanjude@freebsd.org>:
>> The use of DES for anything is discouraged, especially with a static IV of 0
>
> Not entirely related to this, but still...
>
> Do we want to go ahead and also remove DES support from crypt(3)?
> Compared to the other crypt formats, the DES implementation seems
> fairly large, uses global state, etc.
>
> I can send out a change for code review if people {like,don't object to} this.
>
I remember in the 4.x days, there was a documented reason why you might
need to keep des crypt(3) instead of using md5crypt, but I would hope
that went away a long time ago.
I am in favour of this, but I don't know what all of the implications
might be.
We should likely ask someone on secteam@ about this.
--
Allan Jude
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?f6254f52-846c-2be6-b37e-8acf68445a02>