[Discuss] Good and Bad Crypto

[Richard Pieri]

Mike Small wrote:
> So this is kind of what troubles me in the line this thread has taken
> re. checking that the encryption algorithms are well chosen and
> implemented correctly.

That's why the world trusts the cryptographic module in OpenSSL: it's 
been examined and confirmed to be implemented correctly where 
"correctly" is "what FIPS 140-2 says is correct". Microsoft's 
cryptographic library has undergone the same certification so I can say 
that it is implemented correctly to the same "what FIPS 140-2 says is 
correct". The world (and I) don't have the same trust for the GnuTLS 
cryptographic module because it doesn't have that certification.

Heartbleed is something else entirely. It's not a failure to implement 
an algorithm properly. It's a stupid little hack to work around slow 
malloc() calls.

-- 
Rich P.