Am 13.04.2015 um 17:58 schrieb Jeffrey Walton:
>
>
> On Monday, April 13, 2015 at 11:02:18 AM UTC-4, Jean-Pierre Münch wrote:
>
>     Hey Jeffrey,
>
>     I've to say you that (for me) the link is a dead end.
>
> The link is good. I think the HTML markup included the closing paren
> in it. You should be able to trim it from the address bar and get to
> the page. Or, you can visit it locally from the sources.
Checked again. Works now.
>  
>
>     1) Can't we just derive a special drbg class from
>     randomnumbergenerator, so people would have the choice which
>     interface style to use? (and use the new NIST class to derive the
>     NIST DRBGs).
>
> Yes, RandomNumberGenerator will be a base class.
>
> What I am wondering about if/how the policy related objects should fit in.

Could you please state the requirements an approved generator has to
fulfill?
(Reseed every X seconds,...)
I think most can be mitigated by adding new functions that generalize
old ones with good defaults. (Like I did with tweakable blockciphers, so
that processdata() is a special case of processdatawithtweak().
>  
>
>     2) What would be the differences by these new policies? It's still
>     up to the generator on how to interpret seeds and we could simple
>     construct a middle class that does the job as NIST wants it (and
>     encorage use of Fortuna?)
>
> Folks in US Federal and US DoD need to use an approved generator. They
> can't use other generators, like RandomPool or Fortuna.
>  
>
>     3) I've had the same design problem with my Fortuna code and
>     solved it using the approach you described in your "answer" to
>     (3). If you look into my code you'll find a compile-time constant
>     (CRYPTOPP_CONSTANT) named NUMBER_MILLISECONDS_BETWEEN_RESEEDS
>     (very functional name isn't it?) and I think we can solve it in a
>     similar way, maybe again with a middleware class.
>
> OK, thanks.
>
> Jeff

BR

JPM
>
>     Am Montag, 13. April 2015 03:54:20 UTC+2 schrieb Jeffrey Walton:
>
>         The ANSI X9.17 (3-key Triple DES) and X9.31 (AES) based
>         generators cannot be used after December 2015. From SP800-131A
>         (http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-131A/sp800-131A.pdf
>         <http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-131A/sp800-131A.pdf>):
>
>             The ANSI generators are in DEPRECATED status.
>             You can use them from 2010 through 2015. After
>             2015, you MUST use an SP800-90 generator.
>
>         That means Crypto++ will lack an approved generator in 2016.
>
>         SP800-90 specifies 3 replacement generators. The generators
>         have some polices attached to them. Policy includes:
>
>           * How to utilize user supplied seeds
>           * Reseed interval based on bytes provided
>
>         So the questions are:
>
>          1. Do we provide an interface that provides a policy
>         interface and have the 800-90 generators inherit from them (in
>         addition to RandomNumberGenerator)?
>          2. Forgo policy objects, just inherit from
>         RandomNumberGenerator, and hard code the requirements into
>         each implementation?
>          3. Make the reseed limit a template parameter so its a
>         compile time constant?
>
>         (1) seems like its better design, and it follows current
>         practices (for example, see the comments pubhey.h
>         (http://www.cryptopp.com/docs/ref/pubkey_8h_source.html)
>         <http://www.cryptopp.com/docs/ref/pubkey_8h_source.html%29>).
>
>         (2) is a quicker path to a new generator at the expense of
>         design and extensibility.
>
>         (3) does not seem useful since the limits are not moving
>         targets. That is, they are fixed and we can get the same
>         result with `static const unsigned int RESEED_INTERVAL = 4 *
>         1024 * 1024;`.
>
>         Are there other alternatives that I missed?
>
>         Which would be better suited for the library?
>
> -- 
> -- 
> 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]
> <mailto:[email protected]>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
-- 
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/d/optout.

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Reply via email to