3 ms·
Taking an initial look at the OpenSSL documentation it does seem like there is room for improvement in how the code is communicated. Given that OpenSSL is a sec
by reporangers 2y ago
Taking an initial look at the OpenSSL documentation it does seem like there is room for improvement in how the code is communicated. Given that OpenSSL is a security-critical library, I find contributing a bit intimidating, especially when it comes to documentation. However, I believe that with careful implementation and community engagement, I can make a positive impact.
I’m considering the possibility of creating a second documentation page to address specific use cases or common questions without disrupting the existing structure. I want to ensure that experienced developers who rely on the current documentation are not confused by any changes.
I plan to reach out to the OpenSSL community this week to gather more insights and feedback. Thank you for pointing me in this direction!
- rstuart4133 2y agoUnder the hood OpenSSL is a very solid, high performance library that implements crypto primitives. When it is all said and done there is not a lot to crypto primitives as they are all very well defined with straight forward interfaces. Nonetheless, you see lots alternatives to OpenSSL, most of which have headline banners like "easy to use correctly". My guess is the EVP API is the major reason OpenSSL is so difficult to use. Yes, it is poorly documented, but I suspect documentation alone can't save a difficult API. It doesn't have to be that way. Rust is a good example of a language that like Java and OpenSSL is built on lots of abstractions, but nonetheless the doco is a joy to read and follow. A lot of thought has goes into most Rust API's, so that good doco is a product of good API design combined with good document writing. It will be a challenge to put lipstick on this particular pig - but on behalf of all OpenSSL users out there, I wish you luck.