On 4/30/17 11:51 PM, James wrote:
> I think we want standard TLS. I know enough about cryptography to
> know that I really don't want to roll my own. So I guess OpenSSL is
> what we'll use but then, maybe, something else for local file
> cryptography and signing. We might even use OpenPGP as a h
On Apr 28, 2017, at 5:03 PM, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> On 4/28/17 1:13 PM, James wrote:
>> https://github.com/mgorlick/CRESTaceans/tree/master/bindings/libsodium
>> https://github.com/tonyg/racl/tree/master
>
> I'm the author of racl. I've not used mgorlick's code, but one thing
Thanks Neil. I'm aware of the problem of implementation issues, in general,
but I am new to Racket. So, if I understand correctly, this would argue for
using the OpenSSL Racket module for TLS. I think that's the most sensitive
part, in terms of C/C++ bugs and failures, since it's network faci
Hi James,
On 4/28/17 1:13 PM, James wrote:
> https://github.com/mgorlick/CRESTaceans/tree/master/bindings/libsodium
> https://github.com/tonyg/racl/tree/master
I'm the author of racl. I've not used mgorlick's code, but one thing to
bear in mind is that it uses libsodium, where racl uses plain NaC
4 matches
Mail list logo
