Tom McDonald wrote:
>
>
> Hmmm. Can you forward me the note with any details you have on the
> MCRYPT problem? I must have misplaced that note or it did not
> reach me. There really aren't any PHP gods over here but if it
> is protocol related, perhaps we can assist.
>
Done.. You should have the necessary source code snippets, etc. I may
talk my boss into letting me release the control functions rewritten in
PHP so others may use them. They will require PHP compiled with
functioning
regex, mcrypt, mhash, etc... but should come in handy for anyone wanting
to work with SRS in PHP3/4.
>
> Yeah, we would have loved to stay with more "standards-based"
> encryption... after all, SSL and SSH have been scrutinized for a
> long time and have had most, if not all bugs worked out. But SSL
> carries with it a lot of start-up time which is critical when
> authenticating as often as we do. And both of those have licensing
> issues which we have been able to avoid on the resellers' behalf.
I may be wrong, but using either OpenSSL or OpenSSH with a non-RSA
encryption scheme should be legal. Niether piece of software has
any sort of restrictions, but I know RSA has patents on some of the
encryption schemes here in the U.S.
> Perhaps when the RSA license expires in September this year we'll
> have had a revelation as to how to do most of these operations in a
> more efficient manner using SSL. I wasn't aware that there was an
> indication that SSL would be used out of the gate but it must be
> there somewhere. I can only apologize to you folks who did
> pre-development. We made a big shift with the best intentions but
> I know it bit a few who invested time already. ;-(
>
I believe it was in an email from Ross, but it wasn't anything
definitive,
I was gambling a bit with my time on that one (although the work I did
there
will be useful on other projects). If you are interested in
implementing
an SSL or SSH gateway port gateway, and need any ideas... let me know.
The
changing of encryption didn't really bother me, although the major
change in
the protocol caught me a bit off guard. (going from a clear text
protocol to
using a packed 16bit integer to list size of message being sent.)
>
> The docs are very limited. We should be including much more
> detailed documentation with the Jan. 15th roll-out which is
> designed to assist those writing their own client end or extending
> the one we distribute.
>
Great. Fortunately I'll be on the slopes that week, so it'll probably
be waiting
for me when I return. I appreciate your help!
Brad Murray
Graphic Technologies
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue Oct 19 2004 - 23:35:14 EDT