Author christian.heimes
Recipients Arfrever, asvetlov, bjornedstrom, christian.heimes, englabenny, ezio.melotti, gregory.p.smith, habnabit, jcea, maker, pitrou, python-dev, sbt
Date 2013-06-27.10:32:07
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1372329127.46.0.0867946447805.issue16113@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Hi Aaron,

it's a tempting idea but I have to decline. The API is deliberately limited to the NIST interface. Once OpenSSL gains SHA-3 support we are going to use it in favor for the reference implementation. I don't expect OpenSSL to provide the full sponge API.

I also like to keep all options open so I can switch to a different and perhaps smaller implementation in the future. The reference implementation is huge and the binary is more than 400 KB. For comparison the SHA-2 384 + 512 module's binary is just about 60 KB on a 64bit Linux system.

Once a a new API has been introduced it's going to take at least two minor Python release and about four to five years to remove it.

But I could add a more flexible interface to Keccak's sponge to my standalone sha3 module https://pypi.python.org/pypi/pysha3 ...
History
Date User Action Args
2013-06-27 10:32:07christian.heimessetrecipients: + christian.heimes, gregory.p.smith, jcea, pitrou, habnabit, ezio.melotti, Arfrever, asvetlov, englabenny, maker, python-dev, sbt, bjornedstrom
2013-06-27 10:32:07christian.heimessetmessageid: <1372329127.46.0.0867946447805.issue16113@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2013-06-27 10:32:07christian.heimeslinkissue16113 messages
2013-06-27 10:32:07christian.heimescreate