scrypt VS serve

Check out the scrypt encryption tool.

Given that the encryption algorithm is open source (https://github.com/Tarsnap/scrypt) can you try to explain what you mean here?

I wouldn't use OpenSSL personally. If you just need simple but secure symmetric encryption, checkout the scrypt(1) encryption utility from Tarsnap. If you need support for public keys, check out age(1).

scrypt if you strictly only need symmetric encryption.

^ "scrypt page on the Tarsnap website". Retrieved 21 January 2014.

First of all I know that "implementing your own cryptography is bad". However, at some point, one does stumble upon a use-case that is not (well) covered by existing tools.

Now, assuming one has already done his due-diligence and has read (and hopefully understood at least the main ideas of) cryptography related articles / posts / etc. (especially in the area pertaining to what one wants to build), and thus we can assume one is not a complete newbie in this mater, however, nor is he an expert. Basically we can assume he is an "amateur".

Where would one go with his design to ask for feedback about it, in the hope to at least eliminate some weaknesses that one (as a non expert) might have overlooked. (I'm not speaking here about "proofs" or "audits".)

----

More specifically ---- but please let's not get into this right now, this being just an example ---- I'm trying to implement something similar to `scrypt` (the encryption utility, that uses the `scrypt` PBKDF, ) or `age` (), as a replacement to my current solution that relies on GnuPG.

It entirely does and that's exactly my point. Most "hashes" are designed to be fast, for data validation/checking whatever. For securing data (passwords, anonymisation, etc) you want a "hash" to be as slow as possible. Scrypt for example is designed to be extremely slow and use much memory (making GPU-based parallelisation useless and driving up the cost of CPU-based work). The default settings for five-second hashes changes their 18 hour estimate to a bit over two years... and that's assuming you don't turn it up further.

The above code starts a static server (Vercel’s serve) in port 3000. Open the URL in Chrome, open the DevTools, and click the Source tab. You’ll see main.ts as follows:

Another alternative that comes to my mind it is to use the node.js buildpack and serve the static files using serve or similar.

If you don't know how to create a backend, you can try https://npmjs.com/package/serve which is a command that will run a simple server that just serves you the files in a folder (kinda like /public does) but it runs separately from CRA/Webpack so will not affect your app. You then have to take care of fetching and updating the data with fetch() as often as you need.

In app.jsx I've tried removing all the root code and just rendered a typical "Hello World" p tag and it doesn't take nearly as long. I've also ran a basic web server infront of the build folder using serve which suggests it might webpack-dev-server that is having issues with the size of the application (Or could it be saying it's built before it actually is?).

Maybe I was lacking context a bit. I was referencing this actually: https://github.com/vercel/serve/pull/680

https://github.com/vercel/serve (nodejs implementation, therefore requires npm or yarn being installed which are package managers for node)

React.js/ Next.js / Material-UI / Browserify (bundle packaging) / Serve (static site serving) / React-Dropzone (file drag drop) / React-Idle-Timer / zxcvbn.js (Password strength estimation)

https://github.com/vercel/serve (that one should run on every system since it's implemented in NodeJS)