On: Securing PostgreSQL [pdf]

[technion]

You can get a good example of this by simply hitting this link and reviewing the first few hits:

https://github.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=aes+encryption

I'm not going to call out any project by name, but on the first few pages, I see:

- A project which implements unauthenticated CBC mode AES

- A project that does not, in any way, document its mode or implementation beyond "using AES 256"

- A project with <10 commits, more than two years ago, yet over 50 stars

- A project that uses mcrypt

Over all, it is easier to find a project with horrible deficiencies than anything that didn't immediately look concerning. And every one of these boasts "AES 256 encryption".

[Cyph0n → technion]

I see, thank you for explaining. I'll definitely stick to the "known" libraries if I need AES.

[tptacek → Cyph0n]

Be a little more careful than that. Unless you're doing TLS or PGP, you essentially want to stick to NaCL/libsodium, and nothing else.

[Cyph0n → tptacek]

I will keep that in mind, thanks!

[rascul → technion]

What is wrong with mcrypt?

[technion → rascul]

I started writing an answer, but this blog is more comprehensive than anything I could put together:

https://paragonie.com/blog/2015/05/if-you-re-typing-word-mcr...

Problem #2 is something I've hit in multiple real-world codebases.

[tptacek → rascul]

It's a low-level crypto library that leaves avoidance of virtually all the exploitable crypto mistakes as an exercise for the programmer.