Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 06:37:52 -0500 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: Mark Murray <markm@freebsd.org>, Colin Percival <colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Adding standalone RSA code Message-ID: <p06200765bddf38875a04@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <200412101014.iBAAEict086798@grovel.grondar.org> References: <200412101014.iBAAEict086798@grovel.grondar.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 10:14 AM +0000 12/10/04, Mark Murray wrote: > >I must profess to having a degree of discomfort with duplicated >functionality. > >240k is not a big binary, and it sounds like your applet is one >that may get heavy use. Its not built for speed; how much of a >problem is this? Probably not any more than size... How much faster is hardware now than it was when RSA was first written? >If OpenSSL grows hardware BigNum support, your app will not >benefit; how will this affect the user? Is size really a concern? >I can't find a disk smaller than 10 GB at my local dealer. I am usually not too comfortable with duplication either, but I must confess that OpenSSL gives me a headache whenever I try to use it for much of anything. On the other hand, I have never actually used it for RSA :-) I will make a mild vote in favor of a small, well-written library for RSA, but I do not feel very strongly about it. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p06200765bddf38875a04>