On 05/04/2012 01:35 AM, Thomas DuBuisson wrote:
Vincent has done great work for Haskell+Crypto so I think he knows I
mean nothing personal when I say cprng-aes has the right idea done the
wrong way. Why a new effort vs Vincent's package?
1. cprng-aes is painfully slow.
when using the haskell
On 05/04/2012 04:56 AM, Thomas DuBuisson wrote:
On May 3, 2012 5:49 PM, Ertugrul Söylemez e...@ertes.de mailto:e...@ertes.de
wrote:
Thomas DuBuisson thomas.dubuis...@gmail.com
mailto:thomas.dubuis...@gmail.com wrote:
I can't really tell whether the first two points are true.
1. cprng-aes is painfully slow.
when using the haskell AES implementation yes. with AESNI it fly, and even
more when
i'll have time to chunk the generation to bigger blocks (says 128 AES
block at a time)
One data-point -- in intel-aes I needed to do bigger blocks to get decent
My end goal is to have the user use transparently the fastest
implementation available to their architecture/cpu providing they use the
high level module. I've uploaded the cpu package which allows me to detect
at runtime the aes instruction (and the architecture), but i've been
distracted
Vincent uses gcc header files to get the AES instructions:
Header files of:
#include wmmintrin.h
#include tmmintrin.h
And later calls of:
x = _mm_aesenc_si128(m, K1);
But currently you must know you have AESNI and use a flag:
cabal install cryptocipher -faesni
But if you
On 05/04/2012 02:37 PM, Ryan Newton wrote:
My end goal is to have the user use transparently the fastest
implementation available to their architecture/cpu providing they use the
high level module. I've uploaded the cpu package which allows me to detect
at runtime the aes
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Vincent Hanquez t...@snarc.org wrote:
For the language, i think assembly is a no-no with cabal, as such it need
to be embedded in gcc inline assembly if you want to have something that
works (unless there's a secret way to run assembler in a portable fashion
On 05/04/2012 02:33 PM, Ryan Newton wrote:
1. cprng-aes is painfully slow.
when using the haskell AES implementation yes. with AESNI it fly, and even
more when
i'll have time to chunk the generation to bigger blocks (says 128 AES
block at a time)
One data-point -- in
On 05/04/2012 03:05 PM, Thomas DuBuisson wrote:
Vincent uses gcc header files to get the AES instructions:
Header files of:
#includewmmintrin.h
#includetmmintrin.h
And later calls of:
x = _mm_aesenc_si128(m, K1);
But currently you must know you have AESNI and use a flag:
On 05/04/2012 03:18 PM, Brandon Allbery wrote:
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Vincent Hanquez t...@snarc.org
mailto:t...@snarc.org wrote:
For the language, i think assembly is a no-no with cabal, as such it need
to be embedded in gcc inline assembly if you want to have something that
Hi Thomas,
Personally, I would love to see that happen. It seems like the best way to
make split acceptable.
Is Brian Gladman's C implementation still best in class? In my tests even
without AESNI it could exceed the traditional System.Random in performance (
Thomas DuBuisson thomas.dubuis...@gmail.com wrote:
I've grown annoyed at System.Random enough (specifically, StdGen).
How much, if any, pushback would there be if I put together a FFI
binding to a C AES-CTR based RNG. There are many advantages:
[...]
I'd be tempted to pull in the
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 5:26 PM, Ertugrul Söylemez e...@ertes.de wrote:
Thomas DuBuisson thomas.dubuis...@gmail.com wrote:
I've grown annoyed at System.Random enough (specifically, StdGen).
How much, if any, pushback would there be if I put together a FFI
binding to a C AES-CTR based RNG.
Thomas DuBuisson thomas.dubuis...@gmail.com wrote:
Vincent has done great work for Haskell+Crypto so I think he knows I
mean nothing personal when I say cprng-aes has the right idea done the
wrong way. Why a new effort vs Vincent's package?
1. cprng-aes is painfully slow.
2. It doesn't use
On May 3, 2012 5:49 PM, Ertugrul Söylemez e...@ertes.de wrote:
Thomas DuBuisson thomas.dubuis...@gmail.com wrote:
Vincent has done great work for Haskell+Crypto so I think he knows I
mean nothing personal when I say cprng-aes has the right idea done the
wrong way. Why a new effort vs
15 matches
Mail list logo
