5 ms·

Don’t use it, just use WebCrypto API.

by dchest 6y ago

BiteCode_dev 6y ago
It's way lower level, and easier to missuse.
- henriquez 6y ago
  The only low-level thing I noticed about the native Web Crypto APIs is its reliance on typed arrays. The speed difference is night and day as the native stuff can be hardware-accelerated by dedicated CPU instructions. Browser support is very good: https://caniuse.com/#feat=cryptography https://caniuse.com/#feat=cryptography Documentation is also very good: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/SubtleCrypto https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/SubtleCrypt... In terms of "ease of misuse" it's debatable. One of the biggest default security improvements with Web Crypto is that *cryption keys are _not readable by JS_ once instantiated - they can only be used by the cryptographic functions (unless you explicitly make them exportable). This is a subtle but very important defense against certain drive-by attacks that could dump loaded keys from whatever non-native JS crypto library you might be using. In general I don't think it's safe to be using crypto at all outside of basic stuff like password hashing if you don't have a basic understanding of concepts like salt lengths, block cipher modes, hasher output sizes, etc. so I don't really agree with the "easier to misuse" statement. Some library that holds your hand more isn't going to significantly make things safer.
  - codysc 6y ago
    I agree that Web Crypto has a lot to offer. I use it in my latest project. In terms of it being easy to misuse, I think that applies to cryptography in general, but there are some gotchas lingering in javascript. Self blog promoting. I just put this out a few days ago on this very subject. https://pritact.com/blog/posts/crypto-mistakes-part-1.html https://pritact.com/blog/posts/crypto-mistakes-part-1.html
  - memexy 6y ago
    > One of the biggest default security improvements with Web Crypto is that *cryption keys are _not readable by JS_ once instantiated - they can only be used by the cryptographic functions (unless you explicitly make them exportable). This is a subtle but very important defense against certain drive-by attacks that could dump loaded keys from whatever non-native JS crypto library you might be using. That's a really nice feature. This should be better advertised. I wasn't aware that Web Crypto was even a thing.
    - codysc 6y ago
      Yes, that kinda HSMish model of non-extractable keys is a very nice touch. I really wish they would add Argon2 though. PBKDF2 is still a valid choice but there are a lot of HW optimized solvers out there for it.
d0m 6y ago
not available in all js runtime

Don’t use it, just use WebCrypto API.

by dchest 6y ago

Don’t use it, just use WebCrypto API.

BiteCode_dev 6y ago

It's way lower level, and easier to missuse.

henriquez 6y ago
The only low-level thing I noticed about the native Web Crypto APIs is its reliance on typed arrays. The speed difference is night and day as the native stuff can be hardware-accelerated by dedicated CPU instructions. Browser support is very good: https://caniuse.com/#feat=cryptography https://caniuse.com/#feat=cryptography Documentation is also very good: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/SubtleCrypto https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/SubtleCrypt... In terms of "ease of misuse" it's debatable. One of the biggest default security improvements with Web Crypto is that *cryption keys are _not readable by JS_ once instantiated - they can only be used by the cryptographic functions (unless you explicitly make them exportable). This is a subtle but very important defense against certain drive-by attacks that could dump loaded keys from whatever non-native JS crypto library you might be using. In general I don't think it's safe to be using crypto at all outside of basic stuff like password hashing if you don't have a basic understanding of concepts like salt lengths, block cipher modes, hasher output sizes, etc. so I don't really agree with the "easier to misuse" statement. Some library that holds your hand more isn't going to significantly make things safer.
- codysc 6y ago
  I agree that Web Crypto has a lot to offer. I use it in my latest project. In terms of it being easy to misuse, I think that applies to cryptography in general, but there are some gotchas lingering in javascript. Self blog promoting. I just put this out a few days ago on this very subject. https://pritact.com/blog/posts/crypto-mistakes-part-1.html https://pritact.com/blog/posts/crypto-mistakes-part-1.html
- memexy 6y ago
  > One of the biggest default security improvements with Web Crypto is that *cryption keys are _not readable by JS_ once instantiated - they can only be used by the cryptographic functions (unless you explicitly make them exportable). This is a subtle but very important defense against certain drive-by attacks that could dump loaded keys from whatever non-native JS crypto library you might be using. That's a really nice feature. This should be better advertised. I wasn't aware that Web Crypto was even a thing.
  - codysc 6y ago
    Yes, that kinda HSMish model of non-extractable keys is a very nice touch. I really wish they would add Argon2 though. PBKDF2 is still a valid choice but there are a lot of HW optimized solvers out there for it.

d0m 6y ago

not available in all js runtime