On Jan 29, 7:48 am, Tomasz Sobczyk <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm writing a TLS implementation using Crypto++ for the cryptographic > work, and I had no problems until I started to write it to be > backwards-compatible with earlier versions than 1.2. > > The <=1.1 versions use a MD5-SHA1 hash concatenation as the message > hash, and the signature needs to be a 'PKCS#1 block type 1'. > > Since the only thing missing, I think, is the hash to be able to produce > the singature, I thought of creating a HashTransformation class for it, > and then pass it to the singing class template as I do with the others. > > But it seems the signing class uses a 'PKCS_DigestDecoration<Hash>', which I > don't know what it's supposed to contain. Looking at the source it seems > like BER-encoded something. > > In any case, I'd like to know whether the approach I took is okay, and > how should I go about it, if it is. I want to use as much of Crypto++ > as possible here. TLS 1.0 and 1.1 use MD5 and SHA1 as a PRF (IIRC). I don't believe its tunable. It seems to me there's no need to paramaterize it.
Jeff -- -- 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. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Crypto++ Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
