I have completed SHA0, SHA1, MD4, and MD5 in addition to the existing Tiger implementation.
I plan to do MD2 next, for completeness if nothing else.

Regan

-- 
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 11:35:27 +1200, Regan Heath <regan@netwin.co.nz> wrote:
> I have completed SHA0, SHA1, MD4, and MD5 in addition to the existing Tiger implementation.
> I plan to do MD2 next, for completeness if nothing else.

MD2 has been completed and added.
Arcane Jill: What hashing algorithm should I work on next?

Is anyone actually using this stuff. I'm adding it for the fun of it, but it'd be nice to know it was actually useful. :)

Regan.

-- 
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 18:21:42 +1200, Regan Heath wrote:

> On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 11:35:27 +1200, Regan Heath <regan@netwin.co.nz> wrote:
>> I have completed SHA0, SHA1, MD4, and MD5 in addition to the existing
>> Tiger implementation.
>> I plan to do MD2 next, for completeness if nothing else.
> 
> MD2 has been completed and added.
> Arcane Jill: What hashing algorithm should I work on next?
> 
> Is anyone actually using this stuff. I'm adding it for the fun of it, but it'd be nice to know it was actually useful. :)
> 
> Regan.

I will be needing some of this stuff later on. Not quite ready for it yet. Also I'll need some of the proposed crypto stuff from Jill.
-- 
Derek
Melbourne, Australia
6/Jul/04 5:28:25 PM

In article <opsaouhdrl5a2sq9@digitalmars.com>, Regan Heath says...
>
>I have completed SHA0, SHA1, MD4, and MD5 in addition to the existing
>Tiger implementation.
>I plan to do MD2 next, for completeness if nothing else.
>
>Regan

Yay! Absolutely superb! Well done.
Presumably we still need SHA-256 though. The suite won't be complete without it.

Jill



>
>-- 
>Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

In article <ccdkcl$1s5c$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Derek Parnell says...

>Also I'll need some of the proposed crypto stuff from Jill.

I have a "roadmap", but not really a timetable. Random number generation will come next. Full SSL/TLS is still a long way off. Most crypto algorithms require (true) random numbers, so it seems to me I do have to deal with randomness next. What do you need? I can maybe adjust the plan.

(I got sidetracked by Unicode, temporarily, by the way, but I'll be back to crypto as soon as I've got the Unicode stuff in an easily downloadable/useable state and released the codebuilder code. Maybe a week, depending on whether I can get past a librarian page-size problem).

Jill

On Tue, 6 Jul 2004 07:59:09 +0000 (UTC), Arcane Jill <Arcane_member@pathlink.com> wrote:

> In article <opsaouhdrl5a2sq9@digitalmars.com>, Regan Heath says...
>>
>> I have completed SHA0, SHA1, MD4, and MD5 in addition to the existing
>> Tiger implementation.
>> I plan to do MD2 next, for completeness if nothing else.
>>
>> Regan
>
> Yay! Absolutely superb! Well done.
> Presumably we still need SHA-256 though. The suite won't be complete without it.

Done. SHA-512 too! :)
What about RIPEMD?

The code may still need a little bit of a shuffle round. Some functions might need renaming. As an example I have a decode function that deals with big/little endian, it is used in the MD hashes, BUT, the same fn does not work in the SHA ones, instead I had to reverse the endian logic call it decode2 for it to work.

Regan.

> Jill
>
>
>
>>
>> --
>> Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
>
>



-- 
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

"Regan Heath" <regan@netwin.co.nz> wrote in message news:opsaouhdrl5a2sq9@digitalmars.com...
> I have completed SHA0, SHA1, MD4, and MD5 in addition to the existing
> Tiger implementation.
> I plan to do MD2 next, for completeness if nothing else.

Great! But why do MD5, since it is already in Phobos?

In article <ccercg$rgi$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...
>
>"Regan Heath" <regan@netwin.co.nz> wrote in message news:opsaouhdrl5a2sq9@digitalmars.com...
>> I have completed SHA0, SHA1, MD4, and MD5 in addition to the existing
>> Tiger implementation.
>> I plan to do MD2 next, for completeness if nothing else.
>
>Great! But why do MD5, since it is already in Phobos?

Actually, when it eventually arrives, my crypto library will need to use the hashing algorithms in a slightly more plug-innable form than that in which they exist at present. Basically, they will all need to share a common (to-be-defined) architecture, so having them all in the same place where I can get at the source code is a big plus from my point of view.

For example, std.md5 doesn't allow you to manually set the initialization vector to arbitrary contents. Okay, that's reasonable since most people wouldn't need to do that, but for things like stirring entropy pools it comes in dead handy. To make that small change, I'd need write-access to the internals.

I haven't looked at Regan's MD5 implementation (sorry - just too busy), but it's possible it's just a wrapper which calls std.md5. (That's what I would have done). But I do agree that we don't actually need two separate implementations.

Jill

In article <ccf16k$14ta$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Arcane Jill says...
>In article <ccercg$rgi$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...
>>Great! But why do MD5, since it is already in Phobos?

Forgot to add. It is my personal opinion that the md5 module shouldn't live in the root of std or etc, but in the same package as all the other hash algorithms, since this makes for neater, cleaner organization.

As Phobos/Deimos get more and more full of useful packages, we should be wary of filling up the roots with single-purpose instances of anything generic.

But that's just an opinion.
Jill

On Tue, 6 Jul 2004 11:28:22 -0700, Walter <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote:

>
> "Regan Heath" <regan@netwin.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:opsaouhdrl5a2sq9@digitalmars.com...
>> I have completed SHA0, SHA1, MD4, and MD5 in addition to the existing
>> Tiger implementation.
>> I plan to do MD2 next, for completeness if nothing else.
>
> Great! But why do MD5, since it is already in Phobos?

Consistency, plus it was dead simple as I reused all the code from md4.
Regan.

-- 
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/