OpenSSH 10.4/10.4p1 Released
openssh.org
openssh.org
When pq key agreement was added in 2019, it took almost 3 years for it to become enabled by default. This isn't criticism, just an observation. I don't have a pressing need for pq sigs. Always happy for new OpenSSH releases though!
The draft was only published a few months ago:
* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-miller-sshm-mldsa44-e...
The draft is a 'personal document', so not associated with the IETF/WG.
Anyone know if these projects accept PRs to improve these kinds of things, like legibility? Or is it a point of pride?
<!--
DO NOT EDIT MANUALLY! This is generated from:
www/build/openssh/releasenotes.html.head
www/build/openssh/releasenotes.html.tail
See comments in www/build/openssh/Makefile for details.
-->https://github.com/openbsd/www/commits/master
My experience is that minor improvements tend to get accepted if they come with a solid technical motivation and fits into the overall OpenBSD mindset and ecosystem. If the change is simply justified by "best practices" and is rather large, then the conservative choice of just leaving things as they are usually prevail.
For example, I think I have seen two proposals for major overhauls of the OpenBSD.org homepage by "outsiders" over the last three years or so and they were both rejected. However, as you can see by the commit log, minor improvements (including presentation ones) happen all the time.
In the context of the linked site which manually uses line breaks this won’t work well aside from fixing the scroll overflow, the text is small on my iPhone when zoomed out to show the full line width. A fix is better than nothing but does not perfectly fix the issue.
* https://man.openbsd.org/ssh_config.5#MACs
* https://man.openbsd.org/sshd_config.5#MACs
ETM, encrypt-than-mac, variants are at the front of the preference list.
But I can sympathise, our stuff got flagged in audit because we foolishly assumed that some requirement was checked by just having OpenSSH "new enough",but it turned out that RedHat for that RHEL version patched back some old considered insecure primitives to keep their customers happy...