[14489] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Choosing an implementation language
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric Rescorla)
Fri Oct 3 23:48:42 2003
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
To: Tyler Close <tyler@waterken.com>
Cc: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Reply-To: EKR <ekr@rtfm.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: 03 Oct 2003 16:35:53 -0700
In-Reply-To: <20031003203126.GA12833@waterken.com>
Tyler Close <tyler@waterken.com> writes:
> On Thursday 02 October 2003 09:21, Jill Ramonsky wrote:
> > I was thinking of doing a C++ implentation with classes and
> > templates and stuff. (By contrast OpenSSL is a C
> > implementation). Anyone got any thoughts on that?
>
> Given the nature of recent, and past, bugs discovered in the
> OpenSSL implementation, it makes more sense to implement in a
> memory-safe language, such as python, java or squeak. Using a VM
> hosted language will limit the pool of possible users, but might
> create a more loyal user base.
There's already a Java SSL with a simple API:
http://www.rtfm.com/puretls/
-Ekr
--
[Eric Rescorla ekr@rtfm.com]
http://www.rtfm.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
