Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:57:10 +0100
From:      Franco Fichtner <franco@lastsummer.de>
To:        Tomasz CEDRO <tomek@cedro.info>
Cc:        Martin Simmons <martin@lispworks.com>, freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD Security Advisory FreeBSD-SA-20:33.openssl
Message-ID:  <6E2E0169-F2E8-4562-85BA-42FC28B07F35@lastsummer.de>
In-Reply-To: <CAM8r67B6bp6KJH20u-NfwwZEYW6GDH%2BWwRTJqiCjVoWgQQBJOg@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <20201209230300.03251CA1@freefall.freebsd.org> <20201211064628.GM31099@funkthat.com> <202012111138.0BBBc2Eq006002@higson.cam.lispworks.com> <2AF24633-7E9F-4B92-8E99-6A81CD9D3AF8@lastsummer.de> <CAM8r67B6bp6KJH20u-NfwwZEYW6GDH%2BWwRTJqiCjVoWgQQBJOg@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

> On 11. Dec 2020, at 1:36 PM, Tomasz CEDRO <tomek@cedro.info> wrote:
>=20
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 12:44 PM Franco Fichtner wrote:
>>> On 11. Dec 2020, at 12:38 PM, Martin Simmons <martin@lispworks.com> =
wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 22:46:28 -0800, John-Mark Gurney said:
>>>> What are peoples thoughts on how to address the support mismatch =
between
>>>> FreeBSD and OpenSSL?  And how to address it?
>>> Maybe it would help a little if the packages on pkg.FreeBSD.org all =
used the
>>> pkg version of OpenSSL?  Currently, it looks like you have build =
your own
>>> ports if you want that.
>>=20
>> This pretty much breaks LibreSSL ports usage for binary package =
consumers.
>=20
> Why not switch to LibreSSL as default? :-)

Good question.

LibreSSL lacks engine and PSK support. TLS 1.3 was tailing behind.  =
Missing
CMS also was a large issue for those who needed it.  Someone with more =
in-
depth knowledge can probably name more.

The other issue with LibreSSL in general is that third party support is =
mostly
ok, but some high profile cases have had issues with it for years: =
HAProxy,
OpenVPN, StrongSwan just to name a few.  Having ports contributors and =
committers
chase these unthankful quests is probably not worth the overall effort.

It works pretty well as a ports crypto replacement, but for the reasons =
listed
above it is probably not going to happen on a default scale.

Also, LibreSSL in base was a failed experiment in HardenedBSD.  Its =
release cycle
and support policy is tailored neatly around OpenBSD releases and the =
attempt
to break ABI compatibility in packages while you retrofit a new version =
into
a minor release can fail pretty spectacularly.

I'm not being skeptical. I helped improve overall LibreSSL support in =
the ports
tree since 2015.   The LibreSSL team is doing a great job all things =
considered.

This is simply the current reality of keeping LibreSSL in ports a steady
alternative.


Cheers,
Franco




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6E2E0169-F2E8-4562-85BA-42FC28B07F35>