-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 130
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
speck: initial crate #297
speck: initial crate #297
Conversation
d1651ce
to
6debb87
Compare
With cipher v0.4 being released, this is a bit more ready for review, but of course the crate name issue remains. |
I've registered |
I can ask the owners of the current |
Perhaps that could be worth a shot, the crate on crates.io doesn't seem to be very active. If that doesn't work out, I can prepare a commit to change the crate names in the code/README/... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I will check implementation a bit later. For now I only have several minor nits.
One problem with |
@newpavlov if the existing authors are OK with it, we could yank the existing post-1.0 releases and use 0.x releases while our API is unstable, and when we're ready to stabilize, release 2.0. It doesn't have many downloads (2622) and only one downstream dependency ( |
I added some configuration for a |
FYI: I reached out to the owners of the |
Based on https://eprint.iacr.org/2013/404.pdf
Using testvectors from Appendix C of the aforementioned paper.
Notes:
speck
, however, there's already a crate with that name on crates.io, so I think we need to come up with a different name? I've never published on crates.io before.This partially solves #1.