Re: [RFC] Libsodium

On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 6:56 PM, David Zuelke <dz@heroku.com> wrote: > Can we call that extension "sodium" please without the "lib" prefix? > > David > > >> On 07.01.2016, at 08:26, Scott Arciszewski <scott@paragonie.com> wrote: >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> 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. >> >> Scott Arciszewski >> Chief Development Officer >> Paragon Initiative Enterprises <ð¬ >> |·ðP,ÌwÄ€Îhttps://paragonie.com> >> >> -- >> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >> Yes, I don't think that would be controversial. The underlying library is libsodium, but we don't have to refer to our bindings as such. Scott Arciszewski Chief Development Officer Paragon Initiative Enterprises <https://paragonie.com>