From be933cb74270c47b699cbd96bd3e62285514113d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tomas Mraz Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2023 19:21:49 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] 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) --- doc/man7/ossl-guide-migration.pod | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) diff --git a/doc/man7/ossl-guide-migration.pod b/doc/man7/ossl-guide-migration.pod index fc3acef6d9..569c00e2fb 100644 --- a/doc/man7/ossl-guide-migration.pod +++ b/doc/man7/ossl-guide-migration.pod @@ -157,6 +157,14 @@ 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