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

I'm confused, who exactly has had 8 years to do what? Should he have dumped the crypto module because it was using a deprecated feature?


The reason the crypto module was using this particular deprecated feature is that it hasn't been updated at all in 8 years.

The OP should have dropped it because it's unmaintained, and a maintained replacement has existed for a long time: https://cryptography.io/

This is an especially important consideration for security-critical libraries like cryptographic libraries.


See, when you explain what's wrong it's so much better than just blaming the victim with "You've had 8 years"!


One issue the ecosystem currently has, really (and its not the only one, I believe it's difficult almost everywhere), is that tracking dependency-rot is hard. Unless something breaks outright, you'll never know if a library has been abandoned; and manually checking dozens of github/gitlab repos is expensive and tedious.

Pypi has an api (https://pypi.org/pypi/<pkg-name>/json) that can be leveraged to implement alerts like "this pkg last released 5 years ago, it might be dead!". I guess that's what the "security" package uses already. It would be cool if they added an option to report on this sort of thing.


OP here, thanks a bunch for this! I will take your advice and dump the crypto library for this one.


this is text from maual:

> Deprecated since version 3.3, will be removed in version 3.8: The behaviour of this function depends on the platform: use perf_counter() or process_time() instead, depending on your requirements, to have a well defined behaviour.

I would be wary of any crypto library that continued to work with a warning for 8 years and no one bothered to fix it. Most likely no one was maintaining it.




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

Search: