-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Pure Rust implementation of libsodium/utils #89
Comments
I'm definitely interested, but it's not something I'd want to pull the trigger on without some consideration. I can't imagine it doesn't include unsafe code (e.g., to call things like |
Yes it uses unsafe. In fact they are just unsafe functions without any extra abstraction. The good part is that the code is not that big, so you can evaluate it. |
There's a bit of benefit here in that we don't have to provide any libsodium bindings, but I'm a bit on the fence as to whether or not that warrants switching to a dependency that I have audit every time there's an update. I'll give it some consideration. |
There is one more option now in region.rs. No more unsafe (as any manual twiddling of virtual memory APIs will be), but also more active and more readable: https://github.com/darfink/region-rs |
This doesn't really remove |
Err, I meant unsafe in general, not specifically the Rust keyword. "No additional unsafe" might have been better phrasing. |
|
I’m happy to add no_std support.
|
There is crate called memsec which is a pure Rust implementation of libsodium/utils.
Maybe we can replace libsodium entirely? I'm willing to open a PR.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: