|
|
|
|
|
|
by clpwn
2920 days ago
|
|
|
In general, I think it's very important that early-stage security tools make it clear in their copy that the codebase is young, not well audited, and therefore not yet fit for serious usage. It's super fun to play with cryptography, but giving a false confidence to users who may seriously rely on it is what can lead to major problems. |
|
|
Quote from the page:
> Does Oxy have...
> Years of testing and battle hardening? No, it's super green. But hey, if you try it you'll help make it less green!
Maybe not at the top of the page. But at the very least in the relevant section.
I find the page absolutely clear and to the point. Yes - it would be nice with code signing. Being slightly less anonymous might also be better to gain traction. But overall I think it is an impressive start to a rather ambitious goal.