[ENH] AES

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
> [hidden email]
> Sent: None
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [Cryptography Team] [ENH] AES
>
> from preamble:
>
> "Change Set: AES
> Date: 24 November 2006
> Author: Timothy J. Miller
>
> It struck me as convenient to have an AES class.  All I did was subclass
> Rijndael and override new with the relevant block size and key size.  I
> have no idea if this is sufficient, but I suppose it's a start.  Now I
> need to figure out how to write tests."!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
> Cerebus
> Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 6:07 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Cryptography Team] [ENH] AES
>
> On 11/24/06, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > It struck me as convenient to have an AES class.  All I did was subclass
> > Rijndael and override new with the relevant block size and key size.  I
> > have no idea if this is sufficient, but I suppose it's a start.  Now I
> > need to figure out how to write tests.
>
> Just to let everyone know, I *really* don't have any idea what I'm doing.
> :)
>
> Background:  I don't write code in my day job, and it's been many
> years since I've seriously coded at all beyond scripting for my own
> convenience.  Currently I'm working for an FFRDC supporting a
> government PKI, so I've been steeped more in the policy end and riding
> herd on vendors (like Cisco, though I don't think I've ever met
> Krishna before) for the last 10 years, with a dash of sysadmin and
> testing thrown into the mix.
>
> My knowledge of crypto doesn't extend far beyond using the primitives
> to construct protocols & systems.  I don't get the math, I may never
> get the math, but in the end it may not matter.
>
> My interest in Squeak runs back a bunch of years, but I never did more
> than toy with it.  What's changed recently was I got a chance to sit
> in on a demonstration by a couple of guys from MIT Lincoln Labs who
> are doing interesting things with Boneh/Waters/Gentry broadcast
> encryption on a contract.  Their system requires ECC and I thought it
> would be interesting to model their prototype, which led me back to
> Squeak, which led me to this project.
>
> -- Tim
> _______________________________________________
> Cryptography mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cryptography

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
> Cerebus
> Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 6:12 PM
> To: [hidden email]; Cryptography Team Development List
> Subject: Re: RE: [Cryptography Team] [ENH] AES
>
> IIRC it's like "rhine-dahl."
>
> Here's a sound file:
>
> http://rijndael.info/audio/rijndael_pronunciation.wav
>
> -- Tim
> _______________________________________________
> Cryptography mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cryptography

> On 11/24/06, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Added AES192 and overloaded the blockSize: and keySize: methods with
>> do-nothings (is there a better way to do this?) since they make no  
>> sense
>> for AES.  Part of me is thinking that these should be a single class
>> with keySize selection at instance creation.   Comments welcome."!
>
> I'm also working on a couple of tests, but I'll note that I threw a
> couple of FIPS 197 and RFC3602 test vectors at these classes and they
> came out fine.
>
> The more I think about it the more I think I'll refactor as a  
> single class.
>
> -- Tim
> _______________________________________________
> Cryptography mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ 
> cryptography

> On 11/24/06, Joshua Gargus <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> It seems like a good idea to refactor as a single class.  However,
>> even with a single class that can handle multiple key sizes, it seems
>> redundant to have a #keySize: method, when the size of the key can be
>> easily determined in #key: .  It would make sense to make this change
>> in Rijndael, and have AES inherit it.
>
> I *just* posted a refactoring.
>
>> With respect to #blockSize:, it might be better to throw an exception
>> (eg: 'AES does not support multiple block sizes; use Rijndael
>> instead') so that the user is educated, rather than assuming that the
>> method does something when it really doesn't.
>
> Good point.  I guess I'll have to go learn exceptions now.

> IIRC it's like "rhine-dahl."
>
> Here's a sound file:
>
> http://rijndael.info/audio/rijndael_pronunciation.wav
>
> -- Tim
> _______________________________________________
> Cryptography mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ 
> cryptography