| Author |
Keyczar
|
Aryan Khan
Ranch Hand
Joined: Sep 12, 2004
Posts: 289
|
|
Has any one used the Keyczar. Looks pretty cool. I always favored such security tools to hide the complicated JCA and JCE APIs. Also it will use the safe algorithms, key sizes which many might not have a clue of even if they know the JCE & JCA APIs. More features are being added to future releases. Aryan
|
OCP/MCP/SCJP/SCWCD/IBM XML/SCMAD/SCEA-1
|
 |
Set Cruz
Greenhorn
Joined: Jan 31, 2008
Posts: 26
|
|
I haven't used it. I have no plans to try it out. Let me share my opinion as to why. I understand that the raw API's are not convenient, but I'm not sure that adding a level of abstraction is best. The documentation keyczar link promises to select algorithm recipes that are "safe " for the developer. Without further looking into keyczar, I would warn that such "safety" is a dynamic quantity, subject to research trends and discoveries. For instance, SHA1 fell out of favor after collisions had been discovered by researchers. At best, a developer would have to depend on the keyczar release cycle to bring their code to the next level of safety in such an event. At worst, a vulnerability discovered today will simply go unnoticed in an abstracted API.
|
SCJP, Oracle PL/SQL Developer
|
 |
greg stark
Ranch Hand
Joined: Aug 10, 2006
Posts: 220
|
|
|
Perhaps, but all your objections also hold for using lower-level APIs; I think even more so.
|
Nice to meet you.
|
 |
Aryan Khan
Ranch Hand
Joined: Sep 12, 2004
Posts: 289
|
|
Set, Good point there. But there is always trade off. I think such weaknesses in algorithms does not render them "NOT TO USE" from the moment. DES is such an example. Still being used in banking industry. Finding SHA-1 collisions require sufficient computing power and time etc, so looking at the mass application requirements, the cover time etc, to me it worths having a such a level of abstraction. After all how many ppl out there can find SHA-1 collisions as compared to how many can write good Cryptographic applications. Aryan
|
 |
Bear Giles
Greenhorn
Joined: Mar 16, 2006
Posts: 25
|
|
The hard thing in crypto isn't the libraries, it's knowing how to use it in the real world. Libraries are dangerous because they give newbies a false sense of security that they've used the crypto properly. (Glares at 99% of the 'encrypted database' solutions...) (Glares at 90% of the 'here's how you store a server key' solutions...) That said, libraries can be useful on some of the grunt work. E.g., I have a small unpublished library that provides a Spring factory class for each of the appropriate java.security and javax.security classes (themselves injected with the algorithm name and optionally provider) push a few utility classes. But that only took a day to write, hardly worth the hassles of finding and maintaining a third-party library.
|
SCJP 5 & 1.4, SCWCD 1.4, SCBCD 1.3; Security+
|
 |
 |
|
|
subject: Keyczar
|
|
|