On 15/06/14 20:25, Florent Daigniere wrote:
> On Sun, 2014-06-15 at 15:09 -0400, unixninja92 wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Going back to last week quickly, I forgot to mention that I sent an
>> email to the BouncyCastle email list asking them about support for
>> curve 25519 and ed25519. I got one response from a non-BCdev pointing
>> me towards a java implementation of curve 25519 which lead me to the
>> java implementation of ed25519 that I linked last week.
>>
>> This week I wrote the first version of the API for hashing. I really
>> liked how the HashType enum was set up and am planning on using this
>> model for the rest of the API.
>>
>> I started working on the API for signing. I am starting out just
>> supporting ECDSA. I am still working on figuring out the best way to
>> also support our custom DSA classes. After working on this I decided
>> that I would rather wait for BC to support ed25519 than try and
>> support our own implementation as it would be far less messy. The
>> SigType enum will keep track of the curve and algorithm being used so
>> we don't need a private curve class any more.
>>
>> The PreferredAlgorithms class now checks against NSS as well.
>> JCELoader will now check if NSS has Unlimited Policy file. Right now
>> it just prints an error, but maybe we should just not use NSS if it's
>> not unlimited? I can write a check against the java version to
>> determine if it should be used for key generation in java6 [1]. As far
>> as I can tell NSS keys and BC signing seem to work together (at least
>> for benchmarking purposes) but I will do some more testing. I've also
>> added benchmarks for ECDSA and EC for key generation.
>>
>> -Charles
> Good work!
>
> IIRC the whole policy limitation thing goes away in java7... 
No it doesn't.
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/jce-7-download-432124.html
> we'll
> eventually require it to run Freenet... I suggest you design the API
> without thinking twice about it. Also, "recent" crypto in Freenet is
> 128bits... so even if the policy file is not present, it should work.
"Recent" crypto? Meaning what code?

What you actually mean is you intend to use 128-bit encryption for
everything because it's marginally faster and to use 256-bit *properly*
would require using secp384 (slowish) and a better PRNG (relatively
hard). Right?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to