It was suggested to me that I write to the list and raise the
question about cryptography being included in the base image. Really
I have 3 questions I would ask you all:
In light of another recent thread discussing random number generation, discussion about the best approach to random algorithms in cryptography ought be engaged. For instance, the SecureRandom algorithm evidently provides some level of guarantee. To underline the solidity I am attaching a profile of all 102 cryptography tests passing green. This profile demonstrates that there are no areas of particular inefficiency - nothing stands out to be improved - means that the entire library is maximally efficient. And so I please ask that we have these discussions, for there is a lot of value in this package for general and basic use. --
. .. ... ^,^ best, robert
Cryptography Spy Results.text.gz (2K) Download Attachment |
Thank you, Sven, giving me the opportunity to scope the right mailing
lists into the discussion. I love that Pharo is oriented towards business. My particular excitement is to see all the scientific computing. These recent threads on expanding capacity and targeting marketing are good. I think Cryptography in the base, including SecureSession, adds to that effort. The Cryptography package, both for squeak and the Cryptography-Pharo package, and in the Cryptography repository (http://www.squeaksource.com/Cryptography. Through the Monticello Browser this is a loadable item. The loading of SecureSession, which is loadable by both squeak and pharo, ois a separate load. I appreciate that pharo has established a different mechanism for loading. At this time, I am deep into fixing ReedSolomon FEC code, so I must be conservative (which I am) and defer learning and including Cryptography in that mechanism. I must be careful what promises I make and I cannot make a commitment here. If you are interested in seeing this in pharo's catalog, then the Cryptography team welcomes new members, especially from new environments. Welcome. We appreciate all the work that you do! Again, I appreciate the opportunity to engage the community in discussion around the definition and example of a minimal modular image that includes Cryptography & SecureSession in the base. NB: I think that business computing and scientific computing does not equal mobile devices, necessarily. I have long made the case, with varying degrees of effectiveness, that squeak belongs on the server. A SecureSession & Cryptography capability in the base, minimal, headless image is desired: the first question in the OP. Therefore, the correct target of growth is not mobile, it is BigData! On 12/15/2015 05:20 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote: > Robert, > > I think that the Pharo community, part of which is more business oriented, is absolutely interested in more and better Crypto code. In any case, I am. > > What we absolutely want, if it is not already the case (I did not check), is that the Crypto code can be loaded using 1 single action (through our validated Monticello configurations and Catalog mechanism) - I am sure you will find help to achieve and maintain (through a CI process) that goal. > > Whether it should be a base part of the image is another question. Modularity is a huge goal for Pharo. This is a much harder discussion (as the same can be said of or asked for for many packages that are generally useful: XML, CSV, JSON, SQL, ...). In any the case, the first step is the one described in the previous paragraph. Then you need traction, usage, and maybe demand for full inclusion. > > Regards, > > Sven > >> On 15 Dec 2015, at 11:00, Robert Withers <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> It was suggested to me that I write to the list and raise the question about cryptography being included in the base image. Really I have 3 questions I would ask you all: >> >> • is it desirable to include cryptography? >> • is it feasible to include cryptography? >> • what is the time frame for including cryptography? >> Given the thread on password hashing (and salting and so on), there are good, solid implementations in the cryptography package. Looking in the Cryptography repository, there is a Pharo 5.0 compatible Cryptography package. >> >> In light of another recent thread discussing random number generation, discussion about the best approach to random algorithms in cryptography ought be engaged. For instance, the SecureRandom algorithm evidently provides some level of guarantee. >> >> To underline the solidity I am attaching a profile of all 102 cryptography tests passing green. This profile demonstrates that there are no areas of particular inefficiency - nothing stands out to be improved - means that the entire library is maximally efficient. >> >> And so I please ask that we have these discussions, for there is a lot of value in this package for general and basic use. >> >> >> -- >> . .. ... ^,^ best, robert >> <Cryptography Spy Results.text.gz> -- . .. .. ^,^ best, robert |
In reply to this post by Robert Withers
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 05:00:12AM -0500, Robert Withers wrote:
> It was suggested to me that I write to the list and raise the question > about cryptography being included in the base image. Really I have 3 > questions I would ask you all: > > 1. is it desirable to include cryptography? > 2. is it feasible to include cryptography? > 3. what is the time frame for including cryptography? I'm not sure whether it is a good idea to include it in the base image, versus maintain it in an external package that can be easily loaded from SqueakMap. Either way, I think we should get it updated on SqueakMap first so that more people can (and hopefully will) load it in their images, run the tests, and get experience with it. FWIW, I personally tend to favor maintaining packages externally in cases where we have an interest in supporting the package on various kinds of images, such as Squeak/Cuis/Pharo. Robert, are you in a position to update the SqueakMap entries? Currently they are "crypto", "Cryptography", and "Cryptography Team Package". They are all out of date, and I'm not sure who owns which version. We should pick one of them as the official one, and update it so that it loads the latest version (Cryptography-rww.49) into a Squeak 4.6 or 5.0 image. It is of course quite easy to load Cryptography directly from squeaksource, but there are quite a few packages in that repository that may seem confusing for someone loading Cryptography for the first time, so I think a one-click download from SqueakMap would be helpful. Dave |
On 12/15/2015 10:02 PM, David T. Lewis wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 05:00:12AM -0500, Robert Withers wrote: >> It was suggested to me that I write to the list and raise the question >> about cryptography being included in the base image. Really I have 3 >> questions I would ask you all: >> >> 1. is it desirable to include cryptography? >> 2. is it feasible to include cryptography? >> 3. what is the time frame for including cryptography? > I'm not sure whether it is a good idea to include it in the base image, > versus maintain it in an external package that can be easily loaded > from SqueakMap. Either way, I think we should get it updated on > SqueakMap first so that more people can (and hopefully will) load > it in their images, run the tests, and get experience with it. FWIW, > I personally tend to favor maintaining packages externally in cases > where we have an interest in supporting the package on various > kinds of images, such as Squeak/Cuis/Pharo. > > Robert, are you in a position to update the SqueakMap entries? Currently > they are "crypto", "Cryptography", and "Cryptography Team Package". They > are all out of date, and I'm not sure who owns which version. We should > pick one of them as the official one, and update it so that it loads the > latest version (Cryptography-rww.49) into a Squeak 4.6 or 5.0 image. > > It is of course quite easy to load Cryptography directly from squeaksource, > but there are quite a few packages in that repository that may seem confusing > for someone loading Cryptography for the first time, so I think a one-click > download from SqueakMap would be helpful. Thank you for your view of these matters. I must apologize for being forgetful about SqueakMap. I have no idea if I can login or not, it has been years. I have requested a new passwd so shortly I will be in. Do we want these artifacts on SqueakSource and SqueakMap? There are a lot of other packages in Cryptography on SqueakSource. I have cleaned up some of the packages I have in Mushroom. Some, like Blowfish, may want to be folded into the core package. Plugins will want to stay. I suppose better documentation would help, some for Pharo and some for Squeak. I got frustrated in the course of this as I think others did, as well. My apologies for simplifying a complex area and being to simplistic, at times. Regards, Robert > Dave > > -- . .. .. ^,^ robert |
Yes, please. Put the code on SqueakSouce and publish just the script for consuming it on SqueakMap. The best practice is to have one script that a fixed version into a fixed Squeak (e.g., currently 5.0) so there is always a working reference one can go back to, and then one more for the latest code. http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6182 has details and examples. |
I created a new account, since my old one has the wrong email that I
can't access or change. Is there a way someone could update my
email address to this one, please? Otherwise, I will need to get my
new account added to the existing packages.
robert On 12/18/2015 02:57 PM, Chris Muller
wrote:
--
. .. .. ^,^ robert
|
Yes. I've just set the #email: of your 'rww' account to your gmail address. For sake of Catalog model cleanliness, if you wouldn't deleting your new account, it would be appreciated. On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Robert Withers <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |