On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 12:48 pm, Brad Hards wrote:
> I'm considering two options - an intrusive patch that adds a blocksize
> function pointer to gcry_md_spec_t, and then working in terms of the
> ctx->blocksize(), or alternatively a less intrusive, but much uglier
> special casing (if algo == GCRY_MD_SHA384 || algo == GCRY_MD_SHA512). I'd
> prefer to do the first, but the concern I have is that there might be
> external modules, and if I change the size of gcry_md_spec_t, then they
> might break.
I went with a middle ground. See attached patch.
Brad
> I'm considering two options - an intrusive patch that adds a blocksize
> function pointer to gcry_md_spec_t, and then working in terms of the
> ctx->blocksize(), or alternatively a less intrusive, but much uglier
> special casing (if algo == GCRY_MD_SHA384 || algo == GCRY_MD_SHA512). I'd
> prefer to do the first, but the concern I have is that there might be
> external modules, and if I change the size of gcry_md_spec_t, then they
> might break.
I went with a middle ground. See attached patch.
Brad
Attached Files:
-
hmac-sha512-2005-04-19.patch (2.29 KB)