> Don said:
> (PS - Where do I get a copy of the manual of standard notation so
> that I can write these equations with "normal" speak?)
I'm not sure this holy grail exists, but if you ever find it, let me know!
Which reminds me, my previous email about simple editorial mistakes seems to
have gone unnoticed:
1) $3.5 defines "cross-and-circle" symbol for GF multiply, but $4.1 & $4.2 use
"dot" exclusively,
which is not defined. However, "cross-and-circle" is used elsewhere. Choose one
and stick to it.
2) $4.1 and $4.2 psuedo-code both indent update to V ambiguosuly/incorrectly
(it is NOT part of the
"if Y_i"). Using end if statements would be better than relying on indentation:
Z <= 0; V <= X;
for i in 0 to 127
if Y_i then
Z <= Z xor V
end if
V <= V dot P
end for
If you don't beleive me, look at the original GCM spec where this was lifted
from.
3) $5 second para first sentence is grammatically incorrect and slightly
misleading. The second
integer is not "...the number of bytes to be encrypted". It should read:
"...by two integers which _define_ the start and _length_ of the storage
to be encrypted, expressed in bytes. Both should be multiples of 16
bytes
for use with AES-LRW."
4) What happened to $5.1? Section numbering is broken.
Last two points may become irrelevant if $5 is rewritten completely - I plan to
contribute some
suggested text v.soon.
Colin.
