Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Google Is Maintaining A "BoringSSL" Fork Of OpenSSL

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Google Is Maintaining A "BoringSSL" Fork Of OpenSSL

    Phoronix: Google Is Maintaining A "BoringSSL" Fork Of OpenSSL

    A Google engineer has went public on Google's fork of OpenSSL that is tentatively dubbed BoringSSL...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTcyNjM

  • #2
    What's wrong with LibreSSL? Do we really need another Wayland/Mir scenario?

    I sincerely hope that "BoringSSL" only becomes a Google-specific library that is used on Google's servers and mobile phones and nowhere else. I was hoping LibreSSL would be enough but no! We need more forks, one fork for every multi-million dollar company. That is to ensure the fragmentation of the open soruce community!

    Comment


    • #3
      LibreSSL was also unnecessary.

      Comment


      • #4
        libressl is a long time from being ready and will be bsd-only until it is ported. Also libressl is api compatible with openssl, boringssl doesn't maintain compatibility.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by board View Post
          What's wrong with LibreSSL? Do we really need another Wayland/Mir scenario?
          Read his blog. He stated that they have been rebasing OpenSSL with their 70+ patches for a long time (before LibreSSL). They reached a point where such scenario is feasible no more for them and decided to fork and share their things with you.
          They don't force you to use it, but they can't use OpenSSL with their projects.

          Comment


          • #6
            Why does everybody forget about NSS...

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by magika View Post
              They don't force you to use it, but they can't use OpenSSL with their projects.
              And since Google has alot users linked to their web services it pretty much means they're forcing other projects to use it as well and then at some point they will use only google tech.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Filiprino View Post
                LibreSSL was also unnecessary.
                Not true, but keep dreaming.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by vadix View Post
                  Why does everybody forget about NSS...
                  Besides the fact it has a completely different API and so little software has support for it? The license too.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by hajj_3 View Post
                    libressl is a long time from being ready and will be bsd-only until it is ported. Also libressl is api compatible with openssl, boringssl doesn't maintain compatibility.
                    The word "ready" does not seem to mean what you think it does. It is being used now. The base code is intentionally OpenBSD-only to keep it very lean and clean. The last part doesn't make sense with regard to the question being answered. BoringSSL would be an issue if it was used elsewhere.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X