#6164: [with patch, needs work] Phan's Mini-AES for educational purposes
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Reporter: mvngu | Owner: somebody
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.0.1
Component: cryptography | Keywords: Mini-AES, AES, cryptography
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Comment(by malb):
Replying to [comment:3 mvngu]:
Thanks for reminding me about the differences between SR and MiniAES. I am
not opposed to have the MiniAES in Sage, on the contrary I very much
support it. We should have some clear docs somewhere to make sure that
users don't get confused about the various AES variants we have.
> > I guess, they should at least re-use the same building blocks. e.g.
there is an S-Box class which might be worth using, some of the functions
might do the same etc.
> Yes. You got me there. I see what I can do to re-use the building blocks
in {{{sage/crypto/mq/sr.py}}}
{{{mq.SR}}} does not really make use of the S-Box class (since the S-Box
is so structured). Have a look at {{{mq.SBox}}} (a weird place for that
class, I know), it seems it would be useful for your purposes. Also, this
class also gives you difference distribution tables etc. for free.
Btw. {{{`\text{GF}(2^4)`}}} should now be {{{`\GF{2^4}`}}}.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6164#comment:4>
Sage <http://sagemath.org/>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
