# Re: greetings from down under.

David Hook (dgh@aba.net.au)
Fri, 29 May 1998 11:19:00 +1000

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Rick LaBanca: "sslsocket client"
- Previous message: David Brownell: "Re: Certificate chaining"

    Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 11:19:00 +1000

    From: David Hook <dgh@aba.net.au>

    To: Jan Luehe <Jan.Luehe@Eng>, java-security@web1.javasoft.com

    Subject: Re: greetings from down under.

Jan Luehe wrote:

> We were thinking along the same lines and propose the following
> solution which will require minor API changes:
>
> 1. Add...
>
> 2. In SealedObject, change...
>
> 3. When you seal an object,...
>

Looks good.

> > I think this restriction should be lifted. There really should be some
> > way of telling a Cipher about other modes for using an IV. Either by saying
> > something like "DES/CBCInlineIV8/PKCS5Padding" or by extending the
> > IVParameterSpec to tell the Cipher, "no I don't have the value but here's
> > how to calculate it".
> >
> > Thinking about it I probably prefer introducing a standard naming convention.
> > if we simply added PlainIV, EncodedIV, and PassedInIV (default) as
> > extenders to CBC, etc... little should need to change.
>
> This seems like a good idea. I am not sure if the SunJCE provider
> will support those "modes", but I will consider adding those modes
> to the list of "standard algorithm names" in the JCE API Reference & User
> Guide.

At the risk of sticking my neck out, it just occured to me that from an
implementers
point of view, life would be easier if the mode string in the Algorithm was
seperated
by "." ie. CBC.InlineIV.8, or CBC.8.InlineIV, adding the IV option triples the
number
of names you might end up with, and being able to easily parse the String would
make
life a lot simpler. I kind of look at the mode string as programming the Cipher,
rather
than just providing a name...

Thanks for your prompt response,

David.

- Next message: Rick LaBanca: "sslsocket client"
- Previous message: David Brownell: "Re: Certificate chaining"