Re: [Jsdsi-devel] Algorythm names

[Sameer A. <aj...@cs...>]

I don't have time to look at this right now, but I am interested in
checking out the design.  Please mark any additions as "experimental" or
somesuch, because we may want to revise it in the near future.

Thanks,
Sameer

> Been thinking and I believe that the Enum way of going is a good idea
> and so converted the util classes to them.
>
> So in CVS there is my proposal of how to do things. Let me know what you
> think.
>
> Sean
>
>
> On Sun, 2004-05-30 at 22:14, Sean Radford wrote:
>> I guess we could change Algorithms from using straight Strings for the
>> constants to an Enum class style for type-safety.
>>
>> Something akin to:
>>
>> http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/lang/api/org/apache/commons/lang/enum/Enum.html
>>
>>
>> Sean
>>
>> On Sun, 2004-05-30 at 20:52, Sean Radford wrote:
>> > Guys,
>> >
>> > I've committed to cvs 3 classes in jsdsi.util for handling of
>> algorythm names:
>> >
>> > Algorithms
>> > DigestUtils
>> > SignatureUtils
>> >
>> >
>> >  - not implemented any of them yet as want input/comments first.
>> >
>> > The idea being that in Algorithms there is a list of constants which
>> clients use to indicate what they desire, e.g. DIGEST_MD5, KEY_RSA,
>> etc. There are then utility methods to calculate the SPKI or JDK
>> versions of such (This includes the problematic Signatures).
>> >
>> > I would suggest the following coding ethos is JSDSI:
>> >
>> > 1. jsdsi object constructors that need algorythm names use SPKI
>> format names (this is what they should use now as that is the format
>> dumped to Sexpression, and consequently read from a stream)
>> >
>> > Not so sure about Hash.. has anyone looked at an Sexpression for
>> hash and know that if you supply MD5 it comes out (incorrectly) in
>> upper case in the Sexpression? I guess the current implementation
>> would cause a problem with SHA-1? (as in SPKI that should be sha1).
>> >
>> > Which then begs the question: should Hash.getAlgorithm() return the
>> SPKI or JDK version (I guess JDK to be consistent with Key and
>> Signature)?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 2. static create methods use the constants for easy client use.
>> >
>> > The question I have for this is about jsdsi.Signature. Should the
>> create methods take a digest constant and from that calculate the
>> JDK Signature algorythm and corresponding SPKI algorythm using the
>> provided constant and by examining the given keypair?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Thoughts? (in particular problems this approach would lead to with
>> existing applications)
>> >
>> >
>> > Sean
>> >
>> >
> --
> Dr. Sean Radford, MBBS, MSc
> sra...@ae...
> http://www.aegeus-technology.com
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g
> Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g.
>  Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE.
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Jsdsi-devel mailing list
> Jsd...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jsdsi-devel


http://ajmani.net