Home Original page

[Python-Dev] RFC: Backport ssl.MemoryBIO and ssl.SSLObject to Python 2.7

Chris Angelico rosuav at gmail.com
Thu Jun 1 05:50:22 EDT 2017 
On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 7:23 PM, Antoine Pitrou <antoine at python.org> wrote:
>> Do you also disagree on the need of the need of the PEP 546
>> (backport) to make the PEP 543 (new TLS API) feasible in practice?
>
> Yes, I disagree.  We needn't backport that new API to Python 2.7.
> Perhaps it's time to be reasonable: Python 2.7 has been in bugfix-only
> mode for a very long time.  Python 3.6 is out.  We should move on.

But it is in *security fix* mode for at least another three years
(ish). Proper use of TLS certificates is a security question.

How hard would it be for the primary codebase of Requests to be
written to use a C extension, but with a fallback *for pip's own
bootstrapping only* that provides one single certificate - the
authority that signs pypi.python.org? The point of the new system is
that back-ends can be switched out; a stub back-end that authorizes
only one certificate would theoretically be possible, right? Or am I
completely misreading which part needs C?

ChrisA
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list