From owner-svn-src-all@freebsd.org Mon Feb 6 15:24:44 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AE43CD3DCC; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:24:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from allanjude@freebsd.org) Received: from mx1.scaleengine.net (mx1.scaleengine.net [209.51.186.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72903BCA; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:24:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from allanjude@freebsd.org) Received: from T530-Allan.ScaleEngine.net (unknown [91.183.237.24]) (Authenticated sender: allanjude.freebsd@scaleengine.com) by mx1.scaleengine.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 64CC31307C; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:24:42 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: svn commit: r313329 - in head: bin/ed secure/usr.bin secure/usr.bin/bdes usr.bin usr.bin/enigma To: Ed Schouten References: <201702060827.v168RJQY056084@repo.freebsd.org> Cc: src-committers , svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org From: Allan Jude Message-ID: Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 10:24:40 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 15:24:44 -0000 On 02/06/17 10:18 AM, Ed Schouten wrote: > Hi Allan, > > 2017-02-06 9:27 GMT+01:00 Allan Jude : >> 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