Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That was a very reasonable response, I can roll with that.

Just one thing: when I brought up talking directly to the hardware, I did not mean just for performance's sake. Avoiding side-channel attacks often requires to have high control over the generated machine code, and that is the primary reason to not do it in higher-level languages (unless they also permit that level of control).



In Java 8 the JVM knows how to compile AES straight through to AES-NI invocations, so the CPU itself is doing the hardware accelerated crypto (in constant time). It's not necessarily the case that higher level languages have to be unsafer: especially not on something like a server where the overhead of JIT compilers get amortized out.


Okay, but what about other crypto algorithms not implemented in hardware? Eventually someone has to figure out how to generate machine code that operates in constant time across code paths, and they need a language that will let them do that.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: