Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Transport encryption

[Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker]

In message <address@hidden> on Thu, 13 Oct 2005 00:07:45 +0100, Bruce Stephens 
<address@hidden> said:

monotone> In which case the problems with keys and certificates
monotone> doesn't have to be relevant; doesn't TLS have anonymous
monotone> cipher suites, which can be used without either end
monotone> authenticating (and without either having a certificate)?
monotone> In which case that could be used just as an encrypting
monotone> wrapper, and the existing monotone protocol can continue to
monotone> do all the authentication.

I'm not sure why we would want to use anonymous cipher suites.  We
currently sign the stream both ways, right?  Why should we stop?

monotone> So then we're back to TLS libraries not doing asynchronous
monotone> I/O (and not being very convenient to use, which I go along
monotone> with).  I'm reasonably sure GNU TLS is intended to support
monotone> non-blocking I/O; it surely can't be *that* hard to fix it,
monotone> if the I/O turns out not to be quite complete?

I can inform you, again, that OpenSSL supports non-blocking I/O.

Cheers,
Richard

-----
Please consider sponsoring my work on free software.
See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details.

-- 
Richard Levitte                         address@hidden
                                        http://richard.levitte.org/

"When I became a man I put away childish things, including
 the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."
                                                -- C.S. Lewis