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])
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk