On 05/24/2011 06:11 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 05/23/2011 04:12 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> omalleys(a)msu.edu wrote:
>> My question, is how hard is this to implement the hardware support
>> non-openssl programs.
> Not particularly hard if you're writing your own crypto implementation
> anyway, but there's a lot to be said for just linking against OpenSSL.
> It's probably safer to link against the library that has a lot of eyes
> on it than it is to implement your own.
>> OpenAFS could use this as it can use a lot of DES
>> encryption, but it uses its own DES implementation. It also happens to
>> be the only one I can think of off the top of my head that uses its own
>> implementation. It would be nice to have.
gpg seems to use its own AES implementation that's slower than SSL's.
It would certainly be nice to fix that to use acceleration.
Sounds like it might be a good idea to post a feature request to the
upstream bugzilla. Have you checked if there is a build option to make
it link against OpenSSL instead of using the bundled crypto stack?