Re: Cryptography for Boost. +1!

From: Rainer Deyke (rainerd_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-02-29 10:15:24

On 29.02.20 07:23, degski via Boost wrote:
> I was referring to this before, and in this case we are talking about the
> (most?) widely used foss-lib in this field (both C and C++), still you're
> hesitant to use it [I don't mean [at all] you're wrong, just that you're
> hesitant]. How hesitant do you think anyone, but you, would be towards
> anything implemented from scratch (even with a pedigree like Boost)?

I'm not arguing for, or against, any particular strategy for 
Boost.Crypto, or if it should exist at all.  My contribution to this 
thread is limited to pointing out that libsodium is not sufficient for 
all crypto needs.  Something else (like OpenSSL!) is needed when one 
doesn't control both endpoints and therefore needs to use a specific 
crypto method instead of letting the library decide.

For my personal crypto needs, I am happy with libsodium for now, despite 
its limitations.  I may need TSL in the future, in which case I'll take 
a look at the open source libraries providing TSL, including but not 
limited to OpenSSL.  I don't need a C++ implementation, and I don't need 
a C++ wrapper.

-- 
Rainer Deyke (rainerd_at_[hidden])