Re: [RFC] Libsodium

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Bishop Bettini <bishop@php.net> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 8:26 AM, Scott Arciszewski <scott@paragonie.com> > wrote: >> >> I've updated the RFC to make libsodium a core PHP extension in 7.1, to >> include references to the online documentation. >> >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/libsodium >> >> All new functions and classes would exist in the Sodium namespace. e.g. >> >> $ciphertext = \Sodium\crypto_box($message, $nonce, $keypair); >> >> This is part of an overall effort to improve PHP's cryptography; up >> next will be the pluggable crypto API that supports multiple backends >> (with a scope limited to openssl and libsodium at the time of release) >> but always provide conservative defaults. Then I'd like to look at >> deprecating ext/mcrypt back to PECL and add more hash functions to >> ext/hash. > > > +1. Only comment is on namespace: how about \Php\Ext\Sodium? I don't know > if namespacing PHP engine components has been standardized, but I feel we > should limit how often the engine consumes names in the global namespace. > E.g, I could see a user wanting "Sodium" for an app name, but couldn't use > it simultaneously with the libsodium extension. Originally it was Sodium::function_name, but people complained. I don't personally have a stake in this course of discussion. I'm fine with almost anything, but the PECL extension, which has a "stable" release, uses \Sodium\* already. Scott Arciszewski Chief Development Officer Paragon Initiative Enterprises <https://paragonie.com>