RFR: ChaCha20 and ChaCha20/Poly1305 Cipher implementations
Jamil Nimeh
jamil.j.nimeh at oracle.com
Wed Apr 11 15:54:38 UTC 2018
Yes, that does appear to be the case, good catch! I'll make that change.
--Jamil
On 4/11/2018 7:18 AM, Thomas Lußnig wrote:
> Hi,
>
> i found another point. The "key" field can be removed from
> ChaCha20Cipher.
> 1) This field is only set once and later checked if it was initialized.
> But we do not want to knew is the key exists but if key bytes
> exists.
> 2) So if two lines are changed from key to keyBytes we can remove this
> unused field.
>
>
> Gruß Thomas
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jnimeh/reviews/8153028/webrev.02/src/java.base/share/classes/com/sun/crypto/provider/ChaCha20Cipher.java.html
>
> Lines 426 , 461 (change to keyBytes)
> if (key == null
> Line 75+507 (remove)
> private Key key;
> this.key = key;
>
>
> On 4/11/2018 12:34 AM, Jamil Nimeh wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> This is a quick update to the previous webrev:
>>
>> * When using the form of engineInit that does only takes op, key and
>> random, the nonce will always be random even if the random parameter
>> is null. A default instance of SecureRandom will be used to create
>> the nonce in this case, instead of all zeroes.
>>
>> * Unused debug code was removed from the ChaCha20Cipher.java file
>>
>> * ChaCha20Parameters.engineToString no longer obtains the line
>> separator from a System property directly. It calls
>> System.lineSeparator() similar to how other AlgorithmParameter
>> classes in com.sun.crypto.provider do it.
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jnimeh/reviews/8153028/webrev.02/
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --Jamil
>>
>>
>> On 03/26/2018 12:08 PM, Jamil Nimeh wrote:
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> This is a request for review for the ChaCha20 and ChaCha20-Poly1305
>>> cipher implementations. Links to the webrev and the JEP which
>>> outlines the characteristics and behavior of the ciphers are listed
>>> below.
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jnimeh/reviews/8153028/webrev.01/
>>> http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/329
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> --Jamil
>>
More information about the security-dev
mailing list