Move away from libsodium and only use OpenSSL #969
Labels
No labels
Affects/CppNix
Affects/Nightly
Affects/Only nightly
Affects/Stable
Area/build-packaging
Area/cli
Area/evaluator
Area/fetching
Area/flakes
Area/language
Area/lix ci
Area/nix-eval-jobs
Area/profiles
Area/protocol
Area/releng
Area/remote-builds
Area/repl
Area/repl/debugger
Area/store
bug
Context
contributors
Context
drive-by
Context
maintainers
Context
RFD
crash 💥
Cross Compilation
devx
docs
Downstream Dependents
E/easy
E/hard
E/help wanted
E/reproducible
E/requires rearchitecture
Feature/S3
imported
Language/Bash
Language/C++
Language/NixLang
Language/Python
Language/Rust
Needs Langver
OS/Linux
OS/macOS
performance
regression
release-blocker
stability
Status
blocked
Status
invalid
Status
postponed
Status
wontfix
testing
testing/flakey
Topic/Large Scale Installations
ux
No milestone
No project
No assignees
3 participants
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
lix-project/lix#969
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
As @alois31 noticed, we have 2 cryptography libraries linked in Lix: libsodium & OpenSSL.
libsodium is only used to perform ed25519 signatures in one place: valid path info signatures.
This is a critical operation for anyone running a binary cache with trust constraints, libsodium is/was known for how easy is it to use and is a fork of NaCl, a library maintained by famed academical cryptographers.
OpenSSL can perform ED25519 signatures, the big question is whether we can replicate the exact same format.
As discussed on matrix here, libsodium has had some quality bugs where they shipped some busted link flags a while ago, but in general screwing up crypto without it being detected quickly is pretty hard to do, so this is not the highest priority project. Nevertheless, having less code is good :)
This issue was mentioned on Gerrit on the following CLs: