Re: [boost] [crypto] Finalisation

Dear Kevin, I didn't know you were working on your library I thought you have coded one and decided it was enough for your needs and had stopped developing. So if we are both developing I personally think it is more than silly to code two separate libraries instead of focusing on one. If you are interested we could merge the current progress into 1 library. In regards to your comment about the amount of code, I have the following algorithms fully functioning (some need little attention): BlockCiphers: Blowfish, Cast-256, Khazad, Mars, Rijndael, RC2, RC5, RC6, Serpent, Twofish All of the above implementations are generic, for example rc6 is defined as follows: template < size_t R, // # of rounds typename W // word size {uint8_t,uint16_t,uint32_t,uint64_t}
class rc6_cipher;
// the recommended rc6, although completely generic // but the following typedef could gain performance of // 26 Clocks Per Byte (CPB) which is _almost_ as fast as it gets typedef rc6_cipher<20,32> rc6; StreamCiphers: RC4, HC-128/256, Rabbit, Salsa, Sosemanuk Hash Functions: MD4, MD5, SHA-1, SHA-244, SHA-256, SHA-384, SHA-512, Whirlpool, (ifdef BOOST_CRYPTO_EXPERIMENTAL) { MD6, Sekin } Padding: One-zero, ISO-10126, PKCS-7. Mode Of operation: ECB, CBC, OFB, CFB, CTR-E, CTR-D, LRW, XTS mode of operations is something like: template < BlockCipher BlockCipherT, PaddingAlgorithm PaddingAlgorithmT
class XTS; Also endian class which is designed to read/write correct endian values from/to memory. I haven't implemented Public key cryptography because of not having a clear answer to what library to use for large number operations, or for example implement internal library for it. With Best Regards Kasra

Hello Kasra,
So if we are both developing I personally think it is more than silly to code two separate libraries instead of focusing on one. If you are interested we could merge the current progress into 1 library.
I am interested in sharing code, although I'm not too keen right now on adapting more algorithms into my code. I'm working on getting the interfaces right and improving test coverage. And it looks like you have most of what I have implemented plus some more ;-). I don't know if we can agree on the interface for a single library and maybe we shouldn't so that we can merge the best ideas from both in the end. On the other hand it may be possible that our vision is very similar so that working on a single library makes sense. Basically I would like to see your library, since I have seen nothing of your code yet. I don't know if your code is in a state such that you would share it, but I'm not in a hurry - so you can take your time. You can contact me off-list for further discussion. Kevin
participants (2)
-
Kasra
-
Kevin Sopp