This is the mail archive of the ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the eCos project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: IPsec and openSSL packages

From: Andrew Lunn <andrew at lunn dot ch>
To: Armando VISCONTI <armando dot visconti at st dot com>
Cc: ecos-discuss at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:40:03 +0100
Subject: Re: [ECOS] IPsec and openSSL packages
References: <41937090.6040204@st.com> <20041111140726.GR16435@lunn.ch> <4193730A.6030902@st.com> <20041111141851.GU16435@lunn.ch> <41937706.6070707@st.com>

> From this point of view IPsec looks better than OpenSSL.
> But can we say that OpenSSL from other point of views is
> better than IPsec? For example because IP proxies in the
> middle of a chain don't see IP packets in clear? I guess this
> is the way IPsec works ...

You should really talk to somebody who specialises in security for
your particular application and your requirement for security. Its a
very complex field and the little i known is enought to be dangerous
rather than useful!

        Andrew

-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss

References:
- IPsec and openSSL packages
  - From: Armando VISCONTI
- Re: IPsec and openSSL packages
  - From: Andrew Lunn
- Re: IPsec and openSSL packages
  - From: Armando VISCONTI
- Re: IPsec and openSSL packages
  - From: Andrew Lunn
- Re: IPsec and openSSL packages
  - From: Armando VISCONTI

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]