I guess before I even bother opining on the WebCrypto situation, I should probably have a good idea of how Ruby can do better too...
-
-
Replying to @bascule
@bascule more seriously, there are some efforts like krypt (http://bit.ly/10rQSGC ) aiming for secure constructions easily. Not there yet4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @namelessjon
@namelessjon@bascule Going there, step by step :)1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @_emboss_
@_emboss_@namelessjon Krypt is definitely the closest analogue to WebCrypto for Ruby. Please to be keeping it up! :D1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bascule
@bascule@namelessjon Although I want to walk the thin line of offering both low-level stuff (like OpenSSL) and high-level (like Keyczar).2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @_emboss_
@_emboss_@namelessjon if only WebCrypto could do that :|1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bascule
@bascule@namelessjon It seems they value being able to deal with legacy over simplicity. Acceptable, but I had hoped for simplicity, too.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @_emboss_
@_emboss_@namelessjon W3C has washed their hands of normative advice about algorithms /cc@matthew_d_green1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bascule
@bascule@_emboss_@namelessjon Wait, you're saying they made a change? Or that's your description of their whole problem.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@matthew_d_green @_emboss_ @namelessjon nope, no change, but the only offer (bad) non-normative algorithm advice
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.