From: Tomas Mraz Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2023 18:21:49 +0000 (+0100) Subject: Document the implications of setting engine-based low-level methods X-Git-Tag: openssl-3.1.6~112 X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=f8462a352dfaa2cdce933dd2be48bf39ae91b381;p=thirdparty%2Fopenssl.git Document the implications of setting engine-based low-level methods Reviewed-by: Dmitry Belyavskiy Reviewed-by: Neil Horman (Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/23063) (cherry picked from commit dbb478a51d3f695ec713e9829a2353a0d2d61a59) --- diff --git a/doc/man7/migration_guide.pod b/doc/man7/migration_guide.pod index d9e4b37b2bf..28983ea600e 100644 --- a/doc/man7/migration_guide.pod +++ b/doc/man7/migration_guide.pod @@ -156,6 +156,14 @@ To ensure the future compatibility, the engines should be turned to providers. To prefer the provider-based hardware offload, you can specify the default properties to prefer your provider. +Setting engine-based or application-based default low-level crypto method such +as B or B is still possible and keys inside the +default provider will use the engine-based implementation for the crypto +operations. However Bs created by decoding by using B, +B or B APIs will be provider-based. To create a fully legacy +Bs L, L or similar +functions must be used. + =head3 Versioning Scheme The OpenSSL versioning scheme has changed with the OpenSSL 3.0 release. The new