From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 1 16:43:33 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 953A791E for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2015 16:43:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kaduk@mit.edu) Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-6.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-6.mit.edu [18.7.68.35]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FA3C16C9 for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2015 16:43:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kaduk@mit.edu) X-AuditID: 12074423-f79496d000000d43-47-556c8a80fd58 Received: from mailhub-auth-4.mit.edu ( [18.7.62.39]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-6.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 0C.61.03395.08A8C655; Mon, 1 Jun 2015 12:38:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-4.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id t51GcNAx021130; Mon, 1 Jun 2015 12:38:24 -0400 Received: from multics.mit.edu (system-low-sipb.mit.edu [18.187.2.37]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id t51GcLCS026412 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 1 Jun 2015 12:38:23 -0400 Received: (from kaduk@localhost) by multics.mit.edu (8.12.9.20060308) id t51GcLTm027282; Mon, 1 Jun 2015 12:38:21 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2015 12:38:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Benjamin Kaduk To: Roger Marquis cc: freebsd-security Subject: Re: avoiding base openssl when building ports In-Reply-To: <20150601163453.340DA782@hub.freebsd.org> Message-ID: References: <201506010138.t511cp2P088983@gw.catspoiler.org> <20150601163453.340DA782@hub.freebsd.org> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (GSO 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrLIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixG6nrtvQlRNq8H6HokXPpidsFh0L3R2Y PGZ8ms/icez+arYApigum5TUnMyy1CJ9uwSujO2/njAWXOeo+HT+LlsD40e2LkZODgkBE4m5 l74yQ9hiEhfurQeKc3EICSxmkniz7hSUs4FR4tHHP4wQzkEmif2dh9hBWoQE6iXmHvrBBGKz CGhJ7Hi1khHEZhNQkZj5ZiPYChEBVYne02vBapgFjCUOLZ0EZgsLmEmc/PGHFcTmBLI7e36D 9fIKOEpc+fCIBWLZA0aJjh3dLCAJUQEdidX7p7BAFAlKnJz5hAViqJbE8unbWCYwCs5CkpqF JLWAkWkVo2xKbpVubmJmTnFqsm5xcmJeXmqRrplebmaJXmpK6SZGcKi6KO9g/HNQ6RCjAAej Eg9vRnd2qBBrYllxZe4hRkkOJiVRXufKnFAhvqT8lMqMxOKM+KLSnNTiQ4wSHMxKIryyTUA5 3pTEyqrUonyYlDQHi5I476YffCFCAumJJanZqakFqUUwWRkODiUJ3shOoEbBotT01Iq0zJwS hDQTByfIcB6g4fdBaniLCxJzizPTIfKnGBWlxHkngCQEQBIZpXlwvbBU8opRHOgVYd55IFU8 wDQE1/0KaDAT0OB2AbDBJYkIKakGRuNVzhurl9r0mPeLGL2e0XQx7nFjCHPHTC0lLruVzhcu s8cHrlo1WarmBVvoOrvHny9YLd965+ikFU6i8SKbFG7w2s81Wf5iUtGOt3s/Cfz9031g56nI nfYpL2dWmF0p2LPl+vNEuen8l4/9kefvOD/5zIH5H19Z7K22mz/RPOMbR/5bm7vutw2UWIoz Eg21mIuKEwGmRcreAAMAAA== X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2015 16:43:33 -0000 On Mon, 1 Jun 2015, Roger Marquis wrote: > Kimmo Paasiala: > > Rumour is that something like that is going to happen with all of the > > problematic libraries by making them private. If someone with inside > > knowledge could confirm these rumours? ;) > > Curious why this is a rumor? Open source operating systems should be > developed transparently, shouldn't they? I have no concrete data, but something might live as only a rumor if someone is considering making the change and analyzing how much work it would be, before they have any proposal to make or patches for review. > > This leads to another question. Where is the line going to be drawn > > which libraries in the base system should be private? There are > > certainly some of them that have to be public like libc and the > > support libraries like libusb. There is certainly no sense in making > > the ports system use full set of its own libraries for everything > > either. > > I'd be happy just to to 'make buildworld -DWITHOUT_OPENSSL'. Better to set WITHOUT_SSL=yes in /etc/src.conf (see src.conf(5)). -Ben