Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It is and it isn't. Can I plead the 5th?

Yes, the fact that they're using crappy encryption doesn't excuse me.

But (IMO) context matters, and I can't really use something that causes opening a connection to take 1s on a low(er) end server. That would be appropriate for interactive use (i.e. ask a human user for a password), but not every time a connection drops and your server needs another one. And I'm weary to add caching at the library level and risk exposing a side channel.




> And I'm weary to add caching at the library level and risk exposing a side channel.

You mean a cache-timing attack against adiantum?


I mean, caching the KDF result at the library level, without leaking that (e.g.) two databases share a key (that's the first one that came to mind, and why I removed the feature, instead of plugging the hole just to find another one).




Consider applying for YC's W25 batch! Applications are open till Nov 12.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: