[Cryptography Team] [Vm-dev] Smalltalk code calling SHA2Plugin

Tue Jul 21 19:22:43 UTC 2020

Hub Levente,

I like the idea of SHA256 and friends to throw an exception when #new is called directly
SHA256 new.
With a message to call newSHA256.

What do you think?

Kindly,
Robert

On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 14:02, Levente Uzonyi <leves at caesar.elte.hu> wrote:

> Hi Chris,
>
> On Mon, 20 Jul 2020, Chris Muller wrote:
>
>> Hi Levente,
>>
>> > > HashFunction newSHA256
>> > >
>> > > instead of
>> > >
>> > > SHA256 new
>> > >
>> > > in order to take advantage of Levente's plugin.
>> >
>> > That is indeed some sort of a change but it only affects those who
>> > compiled the SHA256Plugin themselves since that plugin wasn't shipped with
>> > the VM.
>>
>> Ah, you're speaking about legacy code. I really hope we can include your plugin in future VM's. Are Eliot, et al, on board?
>
> The most recent VMs ship with the plugins.
>
>> > I decided against the practice of making #new return an instance of
>> > another class than the receiver, as it was with the previous
>> > implementation, because that makes it a lot harder for others to
>> > understand the code.
>>
>> Hm. I sort of agree, although I guess Factory is a recognized pattern. To me, the issue is that writing
>>
>> "SHA256 new"
>>
>> , is a perfectly intuitive and obvious way to use it, but sticking out like a sore thumb as a subversively-wrong-way to-use-it. It'd be better if it threw an error, and even better than that if it just worked.
>>
>> I know you care about the quantity of methods in the image (as do I), how about quality? Can SHA256 #new be improved by doing essentially what HashFunction #newSHA256 does, and simply sending some alternative to new (i.e.,
>
> It's not clear what do you mean by caring about the quantity of methods.
>
>> basicNew initialize) to avoid the recursion?
>
> That would do exactly what I do not want to do: #new would return an
> object whose class is not SHA256.
>
>>
>> Above, you mentioned you decided against the practice, does that mean you're writing:
>>
>> SHA256 newSHA256
>>
>> ? If not, how did you do it?
>
> Use HashFunction's class side #new* methods to create the instances.
> HashFunction is a facade and a factory at the same time.
> I originally wanted to create a separate class for this role named Hasher,
> but HashFunction seemed to work just as well.
>
> Levente
>
>>
>> Thanks again for this great work.
>>
>> - Chris
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 9:55 PM Levente Uzonyi <leves at caesar.elte.hu> wrote:
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> On Sun, 19 Jul 2020, Chris Muller wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Robert and Levente,
>> >
>> > Yes, I *think* so! I'm just now getting up to speed after reading
>> > that epic thread between you and Levente (subject line: "SHA512 squeak
>> > implementation"). Thanks a ton to both of you, BTW, for this work!
>> >
>> > After loading
>> >
>> > ProCrypto-1-1-1
>> > and ProCryptoTests-1-1-1,
>> >
>> > all 205 tests are passing, however, it took me a bit to realize I need to use
>> >
>> > HashFunction newSHA256
>> >
>> > instead of
>> >
>> > SHA256 new
>> >
>> > in order to take advantage of Levente's plugin. This is great, thanks again!
>>
>> That is indeed some sort of a change but it only affects those who
>> compiled the SHA256Plugin themselves since that plugin wasn't shipped with
>> the VM.
>> I decided against the practice of making #new return an instance of
>> another class than the receiver, as it was with the previous
>> implementation, because that makes it a lot harder for others to
>> understand the code.
>>
>> >
>> > Quick side question: Is it okay to reuse a SHA256 instance, or should
>> > I just create a new one for each and every message to hash?
>>
>> All subinstances of HashFunction are reusable. The tests
>> (see HashFunctionTest) do exactly that.
>>
>>
>> Levente
>>
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > Chris
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 6:02 AM Robert Withers <robert.withers at pm.me> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hey Chris,
>> >>
>> >> Did this approach fix your issues?
>> >>
>> >> Kindly,
>> >> rabbit
>> >>
>> >> On 7/13/20 11:46 PM, Robert wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Chris,
>> >>
>> >> You should only need to run #3, which will load Registers. Hasher was from before we integrated the code into ProCrypto-1-1-1.
>> >>
>> >> Installer as project: ‘Cryptography’; install: ‘ProCrypto-1-1-1’.
>> >>
>> >> Then to load tests run:
>> >>
>> >> Installer as project: ‘Cryptography’; install: ‘ProCryptoTests-1-1-1’.
>> >>
>> >> Let us know if any tests fail and we can look into it.
>> >>
>> >> Kindly,
>> >> Robert
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 19:52, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Robert, hi Levente,
>> >>
>> >> I would like to utilize the latest crypto in my next project, would
>> >> you help me with the current proper way to configure my image, and my
>> >> vm with plugins?
>> >>
>> >> (image)
>> >> In going back through some recent messages on the mailing lists and
>> >> instructions on squeaksource.com, I came across these incantations as
>> >> current ways to load the image code:
>> >>
>> >> 1) Installer ss
>> >> project: 'Registers';
>> >> install: 'Registers';
>> >> project: 'Hasher';
>> >> install: 'HAHasher-Core';
>> >> install: 'HAHasher-Tests'.
>> >>
>> >> 2) Installer ss
>> >> project: 'Registers';
>> >> install: 'Registers';
>> >> project: 'Hasher';
>> >> install: 'HAHasher'.
>> >>
>> >> 3) Installer ss project: 'Cryptography'; install: 'ProCrypto-1-1-1'.
>> >>
>> >> I like these one-click-for-everything scripts for crypto -- it
>> >> satisfies the good use-case of development and education, and also
>> >> knowing all what's available to Squeak in one glance. My app's build
>> >> script can cherry pick what it needs, but any advice on which starting
>> >> point above or otherwise is appreciated.
>> >>
>> >> (vm)
>> >> I put the SHA2Plugin.so from Roberts dropbox in the lib directory,
>> >> and it shows up as a "Loaded VM Module" in About Squeak. But, three
>> >> of the "WithPluginTest"'s are failing. My OS is linux_x64. I don't
>> >> know how to build Squeak or plugins from sources, but including it in
>> >> the standard precompiled vm would be so pertinent for Squeak today,
>> >> IMO. SHA256 is one of the ones I'm going to need, so would be nice to
>> >> have it work via plugin. I assume it's a lot faster?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Chris
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 3:52 PM Levente Uzonyi <leves at caesar.elte.hu> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi Robert,
>> >>>
>> >>> With yesterday's help from Eliot and Nicolas, the SHA2Plugin is ready:
>> >>> http://squeaksource.com/Cryptography/CryptographyPlugins-ul.19.mcz
>> >>> The updated version of the image-side code is available in the Hasher
>> >>> repository. You can install it with:
>> >>>
>> >>> Installer ss
>> >>> project: 'Registers';
>> >>> install: 'Registers';
>> >>> project: 'Hasher';
>> >>> install: 'HAHasher-Core';
>> >>> install: 'HAHasher-Tests'.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Levente
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, 10 Mar 2020, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Hi Robert,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Please have a look at:
>> >>>> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2020-March/207851.html
>> >>>> It answers all your questions.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Levente
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Tue, 10 Mar 2020, Robert wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Hi Levente,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I got the SHA2Plugin built and deployed to my Crypto plugins folder. Now I
>> >>>> am trying to figure out how to call it from SHA512.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/yhv253rwrhq0q5p/AAB7PKP2KPiGpDnIyule2h_Ia?dl=0
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> [plugin] I looked at it and please understand I think the classes you wrote
>> >>>> and the framework is really quite nice. I am thrilled we found SHA512! It's
>> >>>> impressive that your one plugin can handle a number of hash functions!
>> >>>>> Now all I need is to find the code that calls the SHA2Plugin. Levente,
>> >>>> would you share that code, please?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Kindly,
>> >>>>> Robert
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20200721/b4698570/attachment-0001.html>