From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
itojun> i see (checked original blowfish paper)...
itojun> BF_encrypt() takes host byteorder values, while most
itojun> of the other algorithms takes values in network
itojun> byteorder. it makes it very hard to use BF_encrypt()
itojun> as core logic in stream cipher. i don't understand
itojun> why this decision was made. at least it must be
itojun> documented.
Well, in a way it is documented, but you're right, it's not documented
as clearly as it could. The document blowfish.pod does say that
BF_encrypt() should not be used directly unless you're implementing a
mode of Blowfish. If all you want to do is encrypt in non-chaining
mode, you should use BF_ecb_encrypt().
I've now extended blowfish.pod to be a little bit more informative on
the quirks of BF_encrypt() and BF_decrypt().
--
Richard Levitte \ Spannv�gen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chairman@Stacken \ S-168 35 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47
Redakteur@Stacken \ SWEDEN \ or +46-709-50 36 10
Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/
Software Engineer, Celo Communications: http://www.celocom.com/
Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400.
See <http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/> for more info.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
