On Feb 10, 2005, at 9:15 PM, Donovan Baarda wrote: > On Tue, 2005-02-08 at 11:52 -0800, Gregory P. Smith wrote: >>> The md5.h/md5c.c files allow "copy and use", but no modification of >>> the files. There are some alternative implementations, i.e. in glibc, >>> openssl, so a replacement should be sage. Any other requirements when >>> considering a replacement? > > One thing to consider is "degree of difficulty" :-) > >>> Matthias >> >> I believe the "plan" for md5 and sha1 and such is to use the much >> faster openssl versions "in the future" (based on a long thread >> debating future interfaces to such things on python-dev last summer). >> That'll sidestep any tedious license issue and give a better >> implementation at the same time. i don't believe anyone has taken the >> time to make such a patch yet. > > I wasn't around for that discussion. There are two viable replacements > for the RSA implementation currently used; > > libmd <http://www.penguin.cz/~mhi/libmd/> > openssl <http://www.openssl.org/>. -- > In the Linux world, openssl is starting to become ubiquitous, so not > including it and statically or even dynamically linking against it is > feasible. However, using Python in other lands will probably require > something to be included. > > Long term, I think openssl is the way to go. Short term, libmd is a > painless replacement that gets around the licencing issues. OpenSSL is also ubiquitous on Mac OS X (as a shared lib): Mac OS X 10.2.8 has OpenSSL 0.9.6i Feb 19 2003 Mac OS X 10.3.8 has OpenSSL 0.9.7b 10 Apr 2003 One possible alternative would be to bring in something like PyOpenSSL <http://pyopenssl.sourceforge.net/> and just rewrite the md5 (and sha?) extensions as Python modules that use that API. -bob
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4