On Friday, January 25, 2019 at 2:14:23 AM UTC+2, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 8:28 AM Olli Savolainen
> > wrote:
> >
> > Oh thanks, that actually seems to work. I had just forgotten the using
> directive so it seemed like SHA256 enum value did
On Thursday, January 24, 2019 at 2:58:54 PM UTC+2, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thursday, January 24, 2019 at 6:49:22 AM UTC-5, Olli Savolainen wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks. The enums available seem to be SHA1 and SHA3.
>> Changing the enum value to SHA3 and
On Thursday, January 24, 2019 at 12:08:05 AM UTC+2, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, January 23, 2019 at 11:09:49 AM UTC-5, Olli Savolainen wrote:
>>
>> Thank you Jeff. I appreciate it a lot.
>>
>> Basically I would like to convert the code in
0 == memcmp( message, (const byte*)recovered,
std::min( messageLen, recoveredLen ) ) );
} // try
catch( CryptoPP::Exception ) {
std::cerr << "Error: " << e.what() << endl;
}
return 0;
}
On Saturday, January 12, 2019 at
Oops, the first link was supposed to be this, like it is on stack overflow.
https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Digital_signature
On Saturday, January 12, 2019 at 1:16:27 PM UTC+2, Olli Savolainen wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> I'm using crypto++ according to the RSA-PSSR-Filter-Test.zip
033029/using-crypto-to-sign-using-private-key-sha1-vs-whirlpool
Kind regards,
Olli Savolainen
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to "Crypto++ Users". More
information about Crypto++ and this group is available at
http://www.cryptopp.com and
http://groups.google.c
