Re: LibTomMath vs MIRACL
From: Peter Gutmann (pgut001_at_cs.auckland.ac.nz)
Date: 07/30/03
- Next message: Bodo Moeller: "Re: Products using RSA, etc"
- Previous message: Henrick Hellström: "Re: Is there any weakness in adding static/known data (salt) to the password hash"
- In reply to: Paul Rubin: "Re: LibTomMath vs MIRACL"
- Next in thread: Phil Carmody: "Re: LibTomMath vs MIRACL"
- Reply: Phil Carmody: "Re: LibTomMath vs MIRACL"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: 30 Jul 2003 14:54:15 GMT
Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> writes:
>You might also take a look at GMP, which is under the Gnu LGPL, and
>(like MIRACL) includes fast assembly code. There is also the bn
>library which is part of OpenSSL. I believe bn is generally pretty
>fast, but not quite as fast as GMP or MIRACL.
The advantage of the OpenSSL bignum code is that it's targeted specifically at
doing crypto, while GMP is a general-purpose numeric package. If your goal is
just to implement the usual suspects { RSA, DH, DSA/Elgamal }, you need to do
quite a bit more work with GMP than with OpenSSL bignum.
Peter.
- Next message: Bodo Moeller: "Re: Products using RSA, etc"
- Previous message: Henrick Hellström: "Re: Is there any weakness in adding static/known data (salt) to the password hash"
- In reply to: Paul Rubin: "Re: LibTomMath vs MIRACL"
- Next in thread: Phil Carmody: "Re: LibTomMath vs MIRACL"
- Reply: Phil Carmody: "Re: LibTomMath vs MIRACL"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]