Re: [go-nuts] The docs for secretbox seem very wrong
On Mon, Oct 9, 2023, 1:59 PM Dean Schulze wrote: > That is mixing concerns (low cohesion), though. At the very least they > need to explain that in the docs. Otherwise that first parameter makes no > sense. > This is a common design pattern in Go. We shouldn't expect that every function that uses it has to explain the idea. We should figure out a way for people to discover and understand it. Ian On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 2:51:11 PM UTC-6 David Anderson wrote: > >> The first parameter lets you avoid an allocation. If you're constructing >> a packet that consists of ciphertext surrounded by some framing, you can >> make([]byte, 0, lengthOfPacket) to preallocate the necessary amount of >> storage upfront. Then, calls to secretbox don't allocate. >> >> If you don't need that behavior, you can pass in a nil as the first >> parameter to get a fresh slice allocated for you by the append(), but in >> hot codepaths involving cryptography, being able to preallocate and reuse >> storage (e.g. via sync.Pool) can give you significant reduction in GC >> pressure. >> >> - Dave >> >> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023, at 08:43, Dean Schulze wrote: >> >> So why even bother with the first parameter then? That looks like a >> badly designed method signature. >> >> On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 8:12:33 AM UTC-6 Axel Wagner wrote: >> >> I get the impression that the thing you are missing is that appending to >> a slice does not modify it. That is, `append(s, x...)` modifies neither the >> length, nor the content of `s`, you have to type `x = append(s, x...)`. >> `Seal` (and `Open`) work exactly the same. They append to the `out` >> parameter - and to enable you to get at the slice, they return it. >> >> The docs could be slightly more clear, by explicitly stating that they >> return the appended-to slice.0 >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 3:46 PM Dean Schulze wrote: >> >> If the docs are correct, how do you append to nil? That's what the docs >> say. Take a look at them. >> >> Your code example shows the first parameter to Seal() can be nil. So >> what does that parameter do? How do you append to it? >> On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:19:13 PM UTC-6 Axel Wagner wrote: >> >> For what it's worth, here is an example that demonstrates a typical >> encryption/decryption roundtrip, perhaps more clearly: >> https://go.dev/play/p/ZZry8IgTJQ_- >> The `out` parameter can be used to make this more efficient by using >> pre-allocated buffers (depending on use case) and there are cases where you >> don't have to send the nonce, because you can derive them from common data, >> which is why both of these parameters are there. But in the most common >> usage, you'd do what this example does. >> >> The example code from the docs tries to be a little bit more efficient >> and packs the `Box` struct into a single byte, perhaps at the cost of >> understandability. >> >> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 7:06 AM Axel Wagner >> wrote: >> >> oh I forgot to emphasize: I don't believe the output is *really* >> ``. That is, I don't believe you can really treat >> the first N bytes as the encrypted text and decrypt it (say, if you didn't >> care about the authentication). It's just that you ultimately need to add >> 16 bytes of extra information to carry that authentication tag, which is >> why the box needs to be 16 bytes longer than the message. In reality, the >> two are probably cleverly mixed - I'm not a cryptographer. >> I just wanted to demonstrate where all the information ultimately goes. >> >> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 7:03 AM Axel Wagner >> wrote: >> >> I don't really understand your issue. You call >> encrypted := secretbox.Seal(nonce[:], []byte(s), , ) >> That means you pass `nonce[:]` as the `out` argument, `s` as the >> `message` argument, and the nonce and key and assign the result to >> `encrypted`. >> According to the docs of `secretbox`, `Seal` will `append` the encrypted >> message to `nonce[:]` and that encrypted message will be 16 bytes longer >> than the message, which is 11 bytes long. Appending 37 (16+11) bytes to a >> 24 byte nonce gives you 51 bytes, which is what you observe as the length >> of `encrypted`. >> The length of `nonce` doesn't change (it's an array, after all) - but >> passing `append` to a slice does not change the length of the slice, it >> just returns a new slice, so that seems expected. >> >> So, from what I can tell, the code does exactly what the docs say it >> should do. >> >> > In their example code the out parameter is nil. So what does it do? >> >> Appending to `nil` allocates a new slice. The point of still accepting an >> `out` parameter is that you can potentially prevent an allocation by >> passing in a slice with 0 length and extra capacity (which can then be >> allocated on the stack, or which is from a `sync.Pool`). If you don't need >> that, passing in `nil` seems fine. >> >> > The second argument is encrypted[len(nonce):] which includes the >> Overhead at the start of the []byte. Apparently that
Re: [go-nuts] The docs for secretbox seem very wrong
That is mixing concerns (low cohesion), though. At the very least they need to explain that in the docs. Otherwise that first parameter makes no sense. On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 2:51:11 PM UTC-6 David Anderson wrote: > The first parameter lets you avoid an allocation. If you're constructing a > packet that consists of ciphertext surrounded by some framing, you can > make([]byte, 0, lengthOfPacket) to preallocate the necessary amount of > storage upfront. Then, calls to secretbox don't allocate. > > If you don't need that behavior, you can pass in a nil as the first > parameter to get a fresh slice allocated for you by the append(), but in > hot codepaths involving cryptography, being able to preallocate and reuse > storage (e.g. via sync.Pool) can give you significant reduction in GC > pressure. > > - Dave > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2023, at 08:43, Dean Schulze wrote: > > So why even bother with the first parameter then? That looks like a badly > designed method signature. > > On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 8:12:33 AM UTC-6 Axel Wagner wrote: > > I get the impression that the thing you are missing is that appending to a > slice does not modify it. That is, `append(s, x...)` modifies neither the > length, nor the content of `s`, you have to type `x = append(s, x...)`. > `Seal` (and `Open`) work exactly the same. They append to the `out` > parameter - and to enable you to get at the slice, they return it. > > The docs could be slightly more clear, by explicitly stating that they > return the appended-to slice.0 > > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 3:46 PM Dean Schulze wrote: > > If the docs are correct, how do you append to nil? That's what the docs > say. Take a look at them. > > Your code example shows the first parameter to Seal() can be nil. So what > does that parameter do? How do you append to it? > On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:19:13 PM UTC-6 Axel Wagner wrote: > > For what it's worth, here is an example that demonstrates a typical > encryption/decryption roundtrip, perhaps more clearly: > https://go.dev/play/p/ZZry8IgTJQ_- > The `out` parameter can be used to make this more efficient by using > pre-allocated buffers (depending on use case) and there are cases where you > don't have to send the nonce, because you can derive them from common data, > which is why both of these parameters are there. But in the most common > usage, you'd do what this example does. > > The example code from the docs tries to be a little bit more efficient and > packs the `Box` struct into a single byte, perhaps at the cost of > understandability. > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 7:06 AM Axel Wagner > wrote: > > oh I forgot to emphasize: I don't believe the output is *really* > ``. That is, I don't believe you can really treat > the first N bytes as the encrypted text and decrypt it (say, if you didn't > care about the authentication). It's just that you ultimately need to add > 16 bytes of extra information to carry that authentication tag, which is > why the box needs to be 16 bytes longer than the message. In reality, the > two are probably cleverly mixed - I'm not a cryptographer. > I just wanted to demonstrate where all the information ultimately goes. > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 7:03 AM Axel Wagner > wrote: > > I don't really understand your issue. You call > encrypted := secretbox.Seal(nonce[:], []byte(s), , ) > That means you pass `nonce[:]` as the `out` argument, `s` as the `message` > argument, and the nonce and key and assign the result to `encrypted`. > According to the docs of `secretbox`, `Seal` will `append` the encrypted > message to `nonce[:]` and that encrypted message will be 16 bytes longer > than the message, which is 11 bytes long. Appending 37 (16+11) bytes to a > 24 byte nonce gives you 51 bytes, which is what you observe as the length > of `encrypted`. > The length of `nonce` doesn't change (it's an array, after all) - but > passing `append` to a slice does not change the length of the slice, it > just returns a new slice, so that seems expected. > > So, from what I can tell, the code does exactly what the docs say it > should do. > > > In their example code the out parameter is nil. So what does it do? > > Appending to `nil` allocates a new slice. The point of still accepting an > `out` parameter is that you can potentially prevent an allocation by > passing in a slice with 0 length and extra capacity (which can then be > allocated on the stack, or which is from a `sync.Pool`). If you don't need > that, passing in `nil` seems fine. > > > The second argument is encrypted[len(nonce):] which includes the > Overhead at the start of the []byte. Apparently that Overhead is important. > > Yes, the Overhead is important. It is used to authenticate the message. > You can imagine the process of `Seal` as "encrypt the message and attach a > hash". The hash is the Overhead. The process also needs a random `nonce`, > that both the sender and the receiver need to know.
Re: [go-nuts] how do you compie and link a go main with an assembly code file?
On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 6:02 PM Peter Riemenschneider wrote: Just '$ go build' as usual, but one must declare the asm function: https://go.dev/play/p/KySqFvCVz_T -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CAA40n-UEhabq5%3DQs5oxYZeL4RW%2BLDfbBap1tzhh5fwTdba7EJA%40mail.gmail.com.
[go-nuts] how do you compie and link a go main with an assembly code file?
I tried to recreate the simplest example:
testAdd.go:
package main
func main () {
_ = add(3,5)
}
addAsm.s:
TEXTmain.add(SB), NOSPLIT|NOFRAME|ABIInternal, $0-16
ADDQBX, AX
RET
I can compile the first program with: go tool compile testAdd.go
I can run the assembler: go tool asm addAsm.s
I have two object files testAdd.o and addASm.o
but linking the two file with the run time fails: go tool link testAdd.o
rutime.a not found.
I looked all over the internet, but this time I cannot find a hint of how
to combine an assmbly written file with a go program to generate an
executable. The examples are all old (prior to go 1.18 when stack function
calls have been replaced by register calls)
any help is very much appreciated,
regards,
peter
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/838b0c1b-e24b-4f5c-bb1f-76599731e2e2n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [go-nuts] Ping on CL bringing AES speedup in CTR mode
נא להכניס את המייל שלי כי אני לא מצליח ב-יום שלישי, 26 בספטמבר 2023 בשעה 19:46:29 UTC+3, Nagaev Boris כתב/ה: > Hi folks! > > I updated the CL https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/413594 to fix > the finding of the LUCI bot. Please take another look :) > > On Sun, Sep 10, 2023 at 6:49 PM Nagaev Boris wrote: > >> Hi again :-) >> >> I addressed feedback in CL >> https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/413594 >> Generators of ASM are now written in Go using template/text instead of >> Python. Also added tests >> Please review! >> >> On Sun, Aug 7, 2022 at 11:59 AM Boris Nagaev wrote: >> > >> > Hi everyone! >> > >> > I sent CL https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/413594 which >> implements ctrAble interface for AES cipher, bringing significant >> performance speedup for amd64 and arm64. I got no feedback yet. What are my >> next steps? >> > >> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "golang-nuts" group. >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >> an email to golang-nuts...@googlegroups.com. >> > To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/97c0d5b1-8e2e-4b72-b8cd-abdeec4be16bn%40googlegroups.com >> . >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Boris Nagaev >> > > > -- > Best regards, > Boris Nagaev > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/67f9f5c9-ba28-4692-9a53-0169f80f4588n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [go-nuts] The docs for secretbox seem very wrong
So why even bother with the first parameter then? That looks like a badly designed method signature. On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 8:12:33 AM UTC-6 Axel Wagner wrote: > I get the impression that the thing you are missing is that appending to a > slice does not modify it. That is, `append(s, x...)` modifies neither the > length, nor the content of `s`, you have to type `x = append(s, x...)`. > `Seal` (and `Open`) work exactly the same. They append to the `out` > parameter - and to enable you to get at the slice, they return it. > The docs could be slightly more clear, by explicitly stating that they > return the appended-to slice.0 > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 3:46 PM Dean Schulze wrote: > >> If the docs are correct, how do you append to nil? That's what the docs >> say. Take a look at them. >> >> Your code example shows the first parameter to Seal() can be nil. So >> what does that parameter do? How do you append to it? >> >> On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:19:13 PM UTC-6 Axel Wagner wrote: >> >>> For what it's worth, here is an example that demonstrates a typical >>> encryption/decryption roundtrip, perhaps more clearly: >>> https://go.dev/play/p/ZZry8IgTJQ_- >>> The `out` parameter can be used to make this more efficient by using >>> pre-allocated buffers (depending on use case) and there are cases where you >>> don't have to send the nonce, because you can derive them from common data, >>> which is why both of these parameters are there. But in the most common >>> usage, you'd do what this example does. >>> >>> The example code from the docs tries to be a little bit more efficient >>> and packs the `Box` struct into a single byte, perhaps at the cost of >>> understandability. >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 7:06 AM Axel Wagner >>> wrote: >>> oh I forgot to emphasize: I don't believe the output is *really* ``. That is, I don't believe you can really treat the first N bytes as the encrypted text and decrypt it (say, if you didn't care about the authentication). It's just that you ultimately need to add 16 bytes of extra information to carry that authentication tag, which is why the box needs to be 16 bytes longer than the message. In reality, the two are probably cleverly mixed - I'm not a cryptographer. I just wanted to demonstrate where all the information ultimately goes. On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 7:03 AM Axel Wagner wrote: > I don't really understand your issue. You call > encrypted := secretbox.Seal(nonce[:], []byte(s), , ) > That means you pass `nonce[:]` as the `out` argument, `s` as the > `message` argument, and the nonce and key and assign the result to > `encrypted`. > According to the docs of `secretbox`, `Seal` will `append` the > encrypted message to `nonce[:]` and that encrypted message will be 16 > bytes > longer than the message, which is 11 bytes long. Appending 37 (16+11) > bytes > to a 24 byte nonce gives you 51 bytes, which is what you observe as the > length of `encrypted`. > The length of `nonce` doesn't change (it's an array, after all) - but > passing `append` to a slice does not change the length of the slice, it > just returns a new slice, so that seems expected. > > So, from what I can tell, the code does exactly what the docs say it > should do. > > > In their example code the out parameter is nil. So what does it do? > > Appending to `nil` allocates a new slice. The point of still accepting > an `out` parameter is that you can potentially prevent an allocation by > passing in a slice with 0 length and extra capacity (which can then be > allocated on the stack, or which is from a `sync.Pool`). If you don't > need > that, passing in `nil` seems fine. > > > The second argument is encrypted[len(nonce):] which includes the > Overhead at the start of the []byte. Apparently that Overhead is > important. > > Yes, the Overhead is important. It is used to authenticate the > message. You can imagine the process of `Seal` as "encrypt the message > and > attach a hash". The hash is the Overhead. The process also needs a random > `nonce`, that both the sender and the receiver need to know. That's why > the > example code sends it along with the message (it doesn't have to be > secret). So that `Seal` call does, effectively (again, for illustrative > purposes): > encrypted := append(append(nonce, ), ) > As `nonce` is an array, this allocates a new backing array for the > returned slice, which ends up filled with > > > The `Open` call then retrieves the `nonce` from the first 24 bytes (by > copying it into `decryptNonce`) and passes the `` > slice as the `box` argument. Which decrypts the message, authenticates > the > hash and appends the decrypted message to `out` (which
Re: [go-nuts] The docs for secretbox seem very wrong
I get the impression that the thing you are missing is that appending to a slice does not modify it. That is, `append(s, x...)` modifies neither the length, nor the content of `s`, you have to type `x = append(s, x...)`. `Seal` (and `Open`) work exactly the same. They append to the `out` parameter - and to enable you to get at the slice, they return it. The docs could be slightly more clear, by explicitly stating that they return the appended-to slice.0 On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 3:46 PM Dean Schulze wrote: > If the docs are correct, how do you append to nil? That's what the docs > say. Take a look at them. > > Your code example shows the first parameter to Seal() can be nil. So what > does that parameter do? How do you append to it? > > On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:19:13 PM UTC-6 Axel Wagner wrote: > >> For what it's worth, here is an example that demonstrates a typical >> encryption/decryption roundtrip, perhaps more clearly: >> https://go.dev/play/p/ZZry8IgTJQ_- >> The `out` parameter can be used to make this more efficient by using >> pre-allocated buffers (depending on use case) and there are cases where you >> don't have to send the nonce, because you can derive them from common data, >> which is why both of these parameters are there. But in the most common >> usage, you'd do what this example does. >> >> The example code from the docs tries to be a little bit more efficient >> and packs the `Box` struct into a single byte, perhaps at the cost of >> understandability. >> >> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 7:06 AM Axel Wagner >> wrote: >> >>> oh I forgot to emphasize: I don't believe the output is *really* >>> ``. That is, I don't believe you can really treat >>> the first N bytes as the encrypted text and decrypt it (say, if you didn't >>> care about the authentication). It's just that you ultimately need to add >>> 16 bytes of extra information to carry that authentication tag, which is >>> why the box needs to be 16 bytes longer than the message. In reality, the >>> two are probably cleverly mixed - I'm not a cryptographer. >>> I just wanted to demonstrate where all the information ultimately goes. >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 7:03 AM Axel Wagner >>> wrote: >>> I don't really understand your issue. You call encrypted := secretbox.Seal(nonce[:], []byte(s), , ) That means you pass `nonce[:]` as the `out` argument, `s` as the `message` argument, and the nonce and key and assign the result to `encrypted`. According to the docs of `secretbox`, `Seal` will `append` the encrypted message to `nonce[:]` and that encrypted message will be 16 bytes longer than the message, which is 11 bytes long. Appending 37 (16+11) bytes to a 24 byte nonce gives you 51 bytes, which is what you observe as the length of `encrypted`. The length of `nonce` doesn't change (it's an array, after all) - but passing `append` to a slice does not change the length of the slice, it just returns a new slice, so that seems expected. So, from what I can tell, the code does exactly what the docs say it should do. > In their example code the out parameter is nil. So what does it do? Appending to `nil` allocates a new slice. The point of still accepting an `out` parameter is that you can potentially prevent an allocation by passing in a slice with 0 length and extra capacity (which can then be allocated on the stack, or which is from a `sync.Pool`). If you don't need that, passing in `nil` seems fine. > The second argument is encrypted[len(nonce):] which includes the Overhead at the start of the []byte. Apparently that Overhead is important. Yes, the Overhead is important. It is used to authenticate the message. You can imagine the process of `Seal` as "encrypt the message and attach a hash". The hash is the Overhead. The process also needs a random `nonce`, that both the sender and the receiver need to know. That's why the example code sends it along with the message (it doesn't have to be secret). So that `Seal` call does, effectively (again, for illustrative purposes): encrypted := append(append(nonce, ), ) As `nonce` is an array, this allocates a new backing array for the returned slice, which ends up filled with The `Open` call then retrieves the `nonce` from the first 24 bytes (by copying it into `decryptNonce`) and passes the `` slice as the `box` argument. Which decrypts the message, authenticates the hash and appends the decrypted message to `out` (which is `nil` in the example code). So, the docs are correct. And it seems to me, the code works as expected. I'm not sure where the misunderstanding is. >>> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "golang-nuts" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to
Re: [go-nuts] The docs for secretbox seem very wrong
On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 3:46 PM Dean Schulze wrote: > If the docs are correct, how do you append to nil? https://go.dev/play/p/WY0Bycj-_Tn -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CAA40n-WtCRNSp8eLQxDfhjhKBhR4UPdciNPNaS9Oj7v1EdBD-Q%40mail.gmail.com.
Re: [go-nuts] The docs for secretbox seem very wrong
Now including the list and hopefully with less typos. :) append returns a new slice. Appending to nil just means that you are guaranteed that the returned slice will be allocated inside the append function. The same happens if you try to append to a slice that does not have enough capacity to hold the appended items (i.e. append will create a new larger one, copy the existing data, add the data to be appended and return the new slice). -Bruno On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 9:46 AM Dean Schulze wrote: > If the docs are correct, how do you append to nil? That's what the docs > say. Take a look at them. > > Your code example shows the first parameter to Seal() can be nil. So what > does that parameter do? How do you append to it? > > On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:19:13 PM UTC-6 Axel Wagner wrote: > >> For what it's worth, here is an example that demonstrates a typical >> encryption/decryption roundtrip, perhaps more clearly: >> https://go.dev/play/p/ZZry8IgTJQ_- >> The `out` parameter can be used to make this more efficient by using >> pre-allocated buffers (depending on use case) and there are cases where you >> don't have to send the nonce, because you can derive them from common data, >> which is why both of these parameters are there. But in the most common >> usage, you'd do what this example does. >> >> The example code from the docs tries to be a little bit more efficient >> and packs the `Box` struct into a single byte, perhaps at the cost of >> understandability. >> >> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 7:06 AM Axel Wagner >> wrote: >> >>> oh I forgot to emphasize: I don't believe the output is *really* >>> ``. That is, I don't believe you can really treat >>> the first N bytes as the encrypted text and decrypt it (say, if you didn't >>> care about the authentication). It's just that you ultimately need to add >>> 16 bytes of extra information to carry that authentication tag, which is >>> why the box needs to be 16 bytes longer than the message. In reality, the >>> two are probably cleverly mixed - I'm not a cryptographer. >>> I just wanted to demonstrate where all the information ultimately goes. >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 7:03 AM Axel Wagner >>> wrote: >>> I don't really understand your issue. You call encrypted := secretbox.Seal(nonce[:], []byte(s), , ) That means you pass `nonce[:]` as the `out` argument, `s` as the `message` argument, and the nonce and key and assign the result to `encrypted`. According to the docs of `secretbox`, `Seal` will `append` the encrypted message to `nonce[:]` and that encrypted message will be 16 bytes longer than the message, which is 11 bytes long. Appending 37 (16+11) bytes to a 24 byte nonce gives you 51 bytes, which is what you observe as the length of `encrypted`. The length of `nonce` doesn't change (it's an array, after all) - but passing `append` to a slice does not change the length of the slice, it just returns a new slice, so that seems expected. So, from what I can tell, the code does exactly what the docs say it should do. > In their example code the out parameter is nil. So what does it do? Appending to `nil` allocates a new slice. The point of still accepting an `out` parameter is that you can potentially prevent an allocation by passing in a slice with 0 length and extra capacity (which can then be allocated on the stack, or which is from a `sync.Pool`). If you don't need that, passing in `nil` seems fine. > The second argument is encrypted[len(nonce):] which includes the Overhead at the start of the []byte. Apparently that Overhead is important. Yes, the Overhead is important. It is used to authenticate the message. You can imagine the process of `Seal` as "encrypt the message and attach a hash". The hash is the Overhead. The process also needs a random `nonce`, that both the sender and the receiver need to know. That's why the example code sends it along with the message (it doesn't have to be secret). So that `Seal` call does, effectively (again, for illustrative purposes): encrypted := append(append(nonce, ), ) As `nonce` is an array, this allocates a new backing array for the returned slice, which ends up filled with The `Open` call then retrieves the `nonce` from the first 24 bytes (by copying it into `decryptNonce`) and passes the `` slice as the `box` argument. Which decrypts the message, authenticates the hash and appends the decrypted message to `out` (which is `nil` in the example code). So, the docs are correct. And it seems to me, the code works as expected. I'm not sure where the misunderstanding is. >>> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "golang-nuts" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to
Re: [go-nuts] The docs for secretbox seem very wrong
If the docs are correct, how do you append to nil? That's what the docs say. Take a look at them. Your code example shows the first parameter to Seal() can be nil. So what does that parameter do? How do you append to it? On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:19:13 PM UTC-6 Axel Wagner wrote: > For what it's worth, here is an example that demonstrates a typical > encryption/decryption roundtrip, perhaps more clearly: > https://go.dev/play/p/ZZry8IgTJQ_- > The `out` parameter can be used to make this more efficient by using > pre-allocated buffers (depending on use case) and there are cases where you > don't have to send the nonce, because you can derive them from common data, > which is why both of these parameters are there. But in the most common > usage, you'd do what this example does. > > The example code from the docs tries to be a little bit more efficient and > packs the `Box` struct into a single byte, perhaps at the cost of > understandability. > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 7:06 AM Axel Wagner > wrote: > >> oh I forgot to emphasize: I don't believe the output is *really* >> ``. That is, I don't believe you can really treat >> the first N bytes as the encrypted text and decrypt it (say, if you didn't >> care about the authentication). It's just that you ultimately need to add >> 16 bytes of extra information to carry that authentication tag, which is >> why the box needs to be 16 bytes longer than the message. In reality, the >> two are probably cleverly mixed - I'm not a cryptographer. >> I just wanted to demonstrate where all the information ultimately goes. >> >> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 7:03 AM Axel Wagner >> wrote: >> >>> I don't really understand your issue. You call >>> encrypted := secretbox.Seal(nonce[:], []byte(s), , ) >>> That means you pass `nonce[:]` as the `out` argument, `s` as the >>> `message` argument, and the nonce and key and assign the result to >>> `encrypted`. >>> According to the docs of `secretbox`, `Seal` will `append` the encrypted >>> message to `nonce[:]` and that encrypted message will be 16 bytes longer >>> than the message, which is 11 bytes long. Appending 37 (16+11) bytes to a >>> 24 byte nonce gives you 51 bytes, which is what you observe as the length >>> of `encrypted`. >>> The length of `nonce` doesn't change (it's an array, after all) - but >>> passing `append` to a slice does not change the length of the slice, it >>> just returns a new slice, so that seems expected. >>> >>> So, from what I can tell, the code does exactly what the docs say it >>> should do. >>> >>> > In their example code the out parameter is nil. So what does it do? >>> >>> Appending to `nil` allocates a new slice. The point of still accepting >>> an `out` parameter is that you can potentially prevent an allocation by >>> passing in a slice with 0 length and extra capacity (which can then be >>> allocated on the stack, or which is from a `sync.Pool`). If you don't need >>> that, passing in `nil` seems fine. >>> >>> > The second argument is encrypted[len(nonce):] which includes the >>> Overhead at the start of the []byte. Apparently that Overhead is important. >>> >>> Yes, the Overhead is important. It is used to authenticate the message. >>> You can imagine the process of `Seal` as "encrypt the message and attach a >>> hash". The hash is the Overhead. The process also needs a random `nonce`, >>> that both the sender and the receiver need to know. That's why the example >>> code sends it along with the message (it doesn't have to be secret). So >>> that `Seal` call does, effectively (again, for illustrative purposes): >>> encrypted := append(append(nonce, ), ) >>> As `nonce` is an array, this allocates a new backing array for the >>> returned slice, which ends up filled with >>> >>> >>> The `Open` call then retrieves the `nonce` from the first 24 bytes (by >>> copying it into `decryptNonce`) and passes the `` >>> slice as the `box` argument. Which decrypts the message, authenticates the >>> hash and appends the decrypted message to `out` (which is `nil` in the >>> example code). >>> >>> So, the docs are correct. And it seems to me, the code works as >>> expected. I'm not sure where the misunderstanding is. >>> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/3d7d75e5-d79a-4f81-978d-cb6feb7b12efn%40googlegroups.com.
