[freenet-tech] Technology / Features

Mon Feb 25 12:46:00 GMT 2002

Brian Jones <cbj@gnu.org> writes:
> Adam could be referring to something else.

Actually that was back when I was trying to use the Cryptix provider
under GCJ in order to use PureTLS. I ran into a sieres of bugs which
led me to believe that whoever wrote libgcj's java.security.* had
never tested it with anything other than the default provider.
At that point I became immensely frustrated and embarked on a five-day
coding binge during which I implemented SSLv3 from the spec, using the
SHA1/MD5/RSA/RC4/x509 primitives in BouncyCastle, which thankfully
doesn't require you to go through the java.security.* nonsense to do
something as simple as 'RSA-decrypt this byte[] using this pair of
java.math.BigInteger's as the key'.
I'm still totally blown away by the performance difference between
HotSpot and GCJ on stuff like this... I can only assume that this yet
another benefit of using the GCC optimizer/backends. I don't think I
was even using -O2 or -fno-bounds-check.
 - a
-- 
"If I put copyrighted material into the 'chewy nougat center', I can
 claim the crunchy chocolate coating is an 'Access Control
 Mechanism'." --lynx_user_abroad
Why Windows NT/2k/XP is unreliable: www.zappadoodle.com