That allows them to avoid the problem, but why introduce the problem in the first place? Why not use something that is intended to be used as a crypto library?
They had an existing API to comply with[1]. NaCl's API doesn't cover everything they need. Their choices were down to 1. Use OpenSSL (or a fork of it, which BoringSSL is) 2. Roll their own crypto. They chose #1 on all other platforms and stayed with #2 on the platforms they control (I might be mistaken here, perhaps they wrap some OpenSSL derivative on their own platforms too). And that in my opinion is a reasonable choice, given the constraints.
Comments
That allows them to avoid the problem, but why introduce the problem in the first place? Why not use something that is intended to be used as a crypto library?
They had an existing API to comply with[1]. NaCl's API doesn't cover everything they need. Their choices were down to 1. Use OpenSSL (or a fork of it, which BoringSSL is) 2. Roll their own crypto. They chose #1 on all other platforms and stayed with #2 on the platforms they control (I might be mistaken here, perhaps they wrap some OpenSSL derivative on their own platforms too). And that in my opinion is a reasonable choice, given the constraints.
[1]: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/cryptokit