News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Nuances of Replacing OpenSSL with Google's BoringSSL.

Re:Nuances of Replacing OpenSSL with Google's BoringSSL by giantahead on Tuesday July 11, 2017 @03:57PM (#14747473)
Having seen the experiment in it's beginning (hola E and team), I wonder: out of things you didn't use, have you found the changes to be 'for better good' as well?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Nuances of Replacing OpenSSL with Google's BoringSSL by 9gunpi on Tuesday July 11, 2017 @05:05PM (#14748055)
Well, folks it's mostly about calling syntax, as it is mentioned in the post, and it's more about ensuring that shooting in the foot is hard.

However, given the change of codebase size, there must be more changes in domains we're not interested in, like implementation of legacy primitives and infrastructure around them.

[ Parent | on HN ]