[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Bignums

To: cme@cybercash.com (Carl Ellison)
Subject: Re: Bignums
From: sameer <sameer@c2.net>
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 16:23:25 -0800 (PST)
Cc: spki@c2.net
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970404150251.00bd3ca8@cybercash.com> from Carl Ellison at "Apr 4, 97 03:02:51 pm"

> 
> I grant that it is more efficient to have the least significant byte in the 
> least address.  I suspect that these libraries actually swap bytes 
> internally.  However, we are presented with a programmer's interface, at 
> least for BSAFE, in which the most significant byte is first.  If we encode 
> bignums as least significant byte first, then we are forced to byte-swap
> whenever we use them.

	It's my understanding/recollection that SSLeay does it the
other way around. Personally preferring SSLeay over BSAFE, I would be
inclined to prefer the SSLeay API over BSAFE. In general, I think
people should consider which crypto libraries are the most used and
set things accordingly.

-- 
Sameer Parekh					Voice:   510-986-8770
President					FAX:     510-986-8777
C2Net
http://www.c2.net/				sameer@c2.net

References:

Re: Bignums

From: Carl Ellison <cme@cybercash.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Certificate Cancellation Notices (CCN)
Next by Date: Re: Bignums
Prev by thread: Re: Bignums
Next by thread: Re: Bignums
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread