Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:87610 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 60534 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2015 14:16:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 4 Aug 2015 14:16:23 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=dennis@birkholz.biz; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=dennis@birkholz.biz; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain birkholz.biz does not designate 144.76.185.252 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: dennis@birkholz.biz X-Host-Fingerprint: 144.76.185.252 mx01.nexxes.net Received: from [144.76.185.252] ([144.76.185.252:48178] helo=mx01.nexxes.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id B4/F1-49831-439C0C55 for ; Tue, 04 Aug 2015 10:16:21 -0400 Received: from [137.226.183.192] (ip3192.saw.rwth-aachen.de [137.226.183.192]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: db220660-p0g-1@packages.nexxes.net) by mx01.nexxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7794948248D; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 16:16:17 +0200 (CEST) To: Anthony Ferrara , =?UTF-8?Q?Lauri_Kentt=c3=a4?= References: <9996b5784a1bfbca80b07de01f1a7a94@k-piste.dy.fi> Cc: PHP Internals Message-ID: <55C0C931.7080405@birkholz.biz> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 16:16:17 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 7.1 Cryptography Projects From: dennis@birkholz.biz (Dennis Birkholz) Hi Anthony, Am 04.08.2015 um 15:25 schrieb Anthony Ferrara: > Lauri, > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Lauri Kenttä wrote: >> On 2015-08-04 14:54, Scott Arciszewski wrote: >>> >>> we do not allow secure modes >> >> I hope that was a typo... ;) > > Indeed, it was not. > > If you want to build an insecure cipher, the primitives will still > exist (openssl/etc). The point here is the missing "in" in the original quote ;-= > Rather than human readable (since that would consume a lot of space in > the resulting ciphertext), I'd suggest a formalized open specification > of the storage formats. Similar to the headers used by TLS and other > formats. That way anyone can build to the specification, which would > be maintained along side the implementation. > > So something like: > > byte 0 : Version identifier > > Version 1: > byte 1 : cipher identifier > byte 2 : mode identifier > byte 3 : authmode identifier > byte 4-8 : cipher-specific settings That is a very good idea to have some crypto format specification that contains the meta data. But is this such a new idea that now format exists already that can hold the required information? No available format we can embrace and that has implementations already? Greets Dennis