[jmspring]

So, the arguments I see are:

- abandonware (fine), bugs, yes, but doesn't invalidate the case if you know the library and the warts

- design flaws make it hard to write correct code, it's crypto, you better know what you are doing regardless of the library

- algorithm identifies are confusing, see point above.

[sarciszewski]

From the article:

    Although it's possible to provide a relatively secure cryptography
    library that builds on top of mcrypt (the earlier version of
    defuse/php-encryption did), switching your code to openssl will
    provide better security, performance, maintainability, and
    portability.

The argument here isn't that mcrypt is doomed/inherently vulnerable, it's two-fold:

1. OpenSSL is a better choice, especially if you're an average PHP developer who is ignoring cryptographers' advice not to deploy your own crypto implementations

2. If a critical bug is found in libmcrypt, since nobody is maintaining it anymore, it is unlikely to get fixed. You are much safer using a library where patches are still being merged.

I hope this makes more sense.