Tink VS wolfssl

> I wonder what people say when they find a bug despite you using standard crypto?

Not using TLS doesn't automatically mean you need to "roll your own crypto". They could have used a well documentend library such as Google Tink[1] instead of doing their own crypto.

[1] https://github.com/google/tink

I sort of rewrote google's tink project in rust. There is already a rust version by project oak but it didn't exactly jive.

PassManager uses the Tink library for encryption, which provides state-of-the-art** security for your passwords. Tink uses industry-standard encryption algorithms like AES to ensure that your passwords are kept safe from prying eyes.

Note that in the example jwt refers to the Tink jwt package.

What I can't tell is if the new version had any fixes related to the bug being discussed here

Even the slightest hiccup could leave me vulnerable. I don't want to roll my own encryption. I want to use something like tink (a secure crypto library by Google) but unfortunately they don't support node or Javascript (there's a library that was published 2 years ago).

I dont have an answer for you, but 2 resources that are worth checking out: https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/security/cryptography and https://developers.google.com/tink

> Do C (or something where the mapping to C is known), and lots of languages have FFI libs where wrapping that is fairly trivial

That is an interesting idea, yet still a lot of work, sadly. I was hoping somebody had done the legwork already. I looked at Tink [1] and age [2] based on my co-worker's recommendation, but they all seem to have limited implementations in other languages.

[1] https://github.com/google/tink

[2] https://github.com/FiloSottile/age

Or something a bit more lightweight - https://github.com/wolfSSL/wolfssl

> I have no room for TLS on micro computer

How micro is your micro? There are embedded TLS stacks such as wolfSSL[1]. If you carefully select the cipher suite and certificate requirements, and perhaps limit TLS payload sizes, you may be able to fit on a lot more systems than you initially suspect. x.509 is expensive in code space though, if that's the constraint, you may do better with an application specific certificate replacement of some sort.

[1] https://www.wolfssl.com/

There are many notable open-source projects (SSLyze, CipherScan, testssl.sh, tls-scan, …) and several SaaS solutions (CryptCheck, CypherCraft, Hardenize, ImmuniWeb, Mozilla Observatory, SSL Labs, …) to do a security setting analysis, especially when we are talking about TLS, which is the most common and popular cryptographic protocol. However, most of these tools heavily depend on one or more versions of one or more cryptographic protocol libraries, like GnuTLS, OpenSSL, or wolfSSL. But why is this such a problem?

wolfSSL 5.0.0