Hi Jan, I loaded just the class CFSHA256 and it worked perfectly (I didn't expect anything else).
I tried some examples from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sha256#Examples_of_SHA-2_variants): (CFSHA256 hashMessage: 'The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog') hex. 'd7a8fbb307d7809469ca9abcb0082e4f8d5651e46d3cdb762d02d0bf37c9e592' (CFSHA256 hashMessage: 'The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.') hex. 'ef537f25c895bfa782526529a9b63d97aa631564d5d789c2b765448c8635fb6c' So I will rename the class to SHA256, moving it to System-Hashing and add SHA256Tests for starters. Sven On 20 Jun 2014, at 17:01, Jan van de Sandt <jvdsa...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I added the SHA256 class to Cloudfork a few years ago. The class was mostly > copied from the Cryptography [1] project. > > Cheers, > Jan. > > [1] http://www.squeaksource.com/Cryptography/ > > > On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 10:56 AM, François Stephany > <tulipe.mouta...@gmail.com> wrote: > Max, > > Yes, it's usable as the SHA1 package already there (without HMAC so). I'm no > expert in those stuff but I don't get "SHA256 base implementation". Someone > with more knowledge can probably tell ;) > > Sven, > > The bare minimum to load it is: > > Gofer it > smalltalkhubUser: 'JanVanDeSandt' project: 'Cloudfork'; > package: 'Cloudfork-Common'; > package: 'Cloudfork-Pharo-Platform'; > load. > > The implementation is in Cloudfork-Pharo-Platform. > > > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> wrote: > I want to have a look, if you tell me where to look... > > On 19 Jun 2014, at 18:03, Max Leske <maxle...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On 19.06.2014, at 17:59, François Stephany <tulipe.mouta...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Does it make sense from a license point of view and practical point of > >> view to include the CloudFork HMAC-SHA256 implementation (CFSH256 class) > >> in the System-Hashing package (in where there's already SHA1 and MD5) ? > > > > Can Cloudfork HMAC-SHA256 be easily parameterized with, say, an SHA256 base > > implementation? Or does it require extra stuff? In the former case I > > probably wouldn’t add it. In the latter case it’s open for discussion. > > Personally, I think it belongs into a separate package, not into > > System-Hashing. > > > > Cheers, > > Max > > > >
