One obvious disadvantage with OpenSSL though is that it is written in C, and thus is more likely to have bugs causing security holes.
/ Martin Nilsson (Åskblod)
Previous text:
2003-01-28 00:41: Subject: Re: OpenSSL wrapper vs Pike's SSL (Was: Bz2)
SSL has been stable for years now. Far longer than OpenSSL has been stable or even existing. If it got dented when a lot of stuff was rearranged in preparation for 7.4 it should be fixed.
I want to hear what is better in OpenSSL, not some general fuzzy feelings about going with the flow. Last time I checked the proto-OpenSSL code - several years ago mind you - it was so damned clutteded that I wouldn't trust sending my cats name over it. Niels code on the other hand, while not always easy to follow, is rather clean.
OpenSSL is faster than Pikes SSL module. That is known. I want to know about other differances in OpenSSLs advantage.
/ Peter Bortas