OWASP / OWASP/ASVS

Crypto appendix - mention missing mechanisms

Open
#2,380 7 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

_5.0 - Not blocker 1) Discussion ongoing AppendixV
Dominant language
HTML
Stars
3.6k
Forks
831
Avg merge
7h 55m
Merged PRs (30d)
4

Description

The following mechanisms are not mentioned and may (?) be missing.

Stream ciphers:

  • Salsa20
  • XSalsa20 (useful to mention explicitly?) (used in libsodium)
  • XChaCha20 (useful to mention explicitly?)

Block ciphers (found in the recommended TLS ciphersuites, are they used in practice?):

  • ARIA
  • Camellia

→ I did not find much usage of these two. Browsers don't advertise them in TLS ciphersuites for example. We can probably skip mentioning them for now.

Hash:

Key Exchange:

Moreover (and for better PQC compliance), I would remove:

Any other cipher options MUST NOT be used.

[...]

Any other method for key wrapping MUST NOT be used.

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Read the crypto appendix and the linked algorithm references first. Resolve which mechanisms should be documented and whether the quoted MUST NOT constraints remain; done means the appendix and normative text reflect an agreed, reviewed scope.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Domain
cryptography, documentation, security
Issue type
Documentation
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
25/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.