Re: Cryptography for Boost. +1!

From: degski (degski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-02-26 15:14:56

On Mon, 24 Feb 2020 at 01:53, Ggh via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> +1
>

I don't think this is a good idea. Crypto is very hard and 'generic' crypto
is not useful to amateurs (that's the intended audience for this
Boost-component), imho (unless one insists on doing it wrongly). A
crypto-lib should not be generic, but should be guiding and advising (this
is not a Boost-approach to things, in general), like 'libsodium' does. Of
course it's possible to put this functionality into Boost, but for what
gain (other then the dependency explosion)? Also for safety, and
usefulness, it [the lib] should have a c-api. This also does away with all
the issues regarding c++std's, particularly std::string is affected by this
(and probably used quite a bit (or could be used quite a bit), depending on
which std is in effect.

degski
-- 
@realdegski
https://brave.com/google-gdpr-workaround/
"We value your privacy, click here!" Sod off! - degski
"Anyone who believes that exponential growth can go on forever in a finite
world is either a madman or an economist" - Kenneth E. Boulding
"Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell" - Edward
P. Abbey