[Cryptography] Why aren’t we using SSH for everything?

[Christoph Anton Mitterer]

On Mon, 2015-01-05 at 15:29 +1300, Peter Gutmann wrote: 
> >hmac-sha1-etm at openssh.com
> >hmac-sha1-96-etm at openssh.com
> >hmac-sha2-256-etm at openssh.com
> >hmac-sha2-512-etm at openssh.com
> >hmac-md5-etm at openssh.com
> >hmac-md5-96-etm at openssh.com
> >hmac-ripemd160-etm at openssh.com
> >umac-64-etm at openssh.com
> >umac-128-etm at openssh.com
> 
> I've done the same thing, but the problem is that a bunch of (probably)
> incompatible vendor-specific extensions doesn't profit the community as a
> whole.  If anyone from OpenSSH would like to get in touch, we can (a) see if
> what we're doing is interoperable and (b) document it in an RFC for general
> adoption.
http://www.openssh.com/specs.html, there's the "SSH protocol version 2
vendor extensions" section which contains documents "standardising" all
the OpenSSH extensions.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5313 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20150105/3aa19442/attachment.bin>