While I'm happy to see my own work in an august list like that, I'd just like to point out that saying anything based on NaCl is "basically the same thing" is like accusing any scheme using sha256 and aes256 primitives of being the "same thing". If the schemes are not compatible or close to compatible, if they have different threat models or implementations, or different intended use-cases, they can hardly be called the same thing. Now, miniLock format could be used as a PGP alternative, and I'd be interested in making deadlock suitable for hooking into mail clients that can preprocess incoming or outgoing mail with user-configured scripts so it could be used as such, but I don't think it wasn't written for that (ask Nadim his intended use-case for miniLock, I guess). So, while all of those are NaCl based, I'd say only miniLock and deadlock are "essentially the same thing" because they're implementations of the same protocol and basic use-case. On 13/08/14 11:05, Thomas von Dein wrote:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 07:42:16PM +0100, Cathal Garvey wrote:
For those who aren't so keen on JS crypto even when implemented as an extension (or for those who, like me, think of Chromium as gussied up spyware), I re-implemeted miniLock in Python and released it today on Github and PyPI:
https://github.com/cathalgarvey/deadlock https://pypi.python.org/pypi/deadlock
So, now there are 5 different implementations for essentially the same thing:
- reop (http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/reop) - pbp (https://github.com/stef/pbp) - pcp (https://github.com/TLINDEN/pcp) - minilock: (http://minilock.io) - deadlock (https://github.com/cathalgarvey/deadlock)
- Tom
-- Twitter: @onetruecathal, @formabiolabs Phone: +353876363185 Blog: http://indiebiotech.com miniLock.io: JjmYYngs7akLZUjkvFkuYdsZ3PyPHSZRBKNm6qTYKZfAM