[gnutls-devel] GnuTLS | Soft-disabling configuration capabilities should match the hard-disabling ones (#1172)

Read-only notification of GnuTLS library development activities gnutls-devel at lists.gnutls.org
Tue Mar 16 03:12:00 CET 2021

Daiki Ueno commented:

This is probably a stupid idea, but I was thinking to allow multiple named `[overrides]` sections, e.g., `[overrides.EXAMPLE]`. The name (`EXAMPLE`) can be referred to in the `[priorities]` section. That way, we can overcome the limitation of priority strings and also define soft-disablement in a declarative manner in a single place.

For example:
insecure-sig = rsa-sha1

insecure-sig = rsa-sha256


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitLab: https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls/-/issues/1172#note_529897405
You're receiving this email because of your account on gitlab.com.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnutls-devel/attachments/20210316/91345e8c/attachment.html>

More information about the Gnutls-devel mailing list