Hello Jeffrey Walton: On Feb 7, 2009, at 23:10 PM, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> As if you were not busy enough... In addition to CCM and GCM, a > CMAC [1] and Poly 1305 [2] implementation may warrant the birth of > Crypto++ 6.0. Per [3], I'm no longer asking for Poly1305, because I'm not currently needing to use a MAC. Just to summarize that thread, I currently suspect that Poly1305 is a more efficient algorithm than VMAC on low-power 32-bit CPUs, but perhaps that is because the Crypto++ implementation of VMAC hasn't been optimized for that purpose . Regards, Zooko [1] http://groups.google.com/group/cryptopp-users/browse_thread/ thread/c0f70a3634af4fd7 [2] http://groups.google.com/group/cryptopp-users/browse_thread/ thread/45ea0386804faced [3] http://groups.google.com/group/cryptopp-users/browse_thread/ thread/f704367a90b3724f/f134424b509ce128? lnk=gst&q=poly1305#f134424b509ce128 --- Tahoe, the Least-Authority Filesystem -- http://allmydata.org store your data: $10/month -- http://allmydata.com/?tracking=zsig --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the "Crypto++ Users" Google Group. To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected]. More information about Crypto++ and this group is available at http://www.cryptopp.com. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
