[Mono-dev] Mono Encryption

[Miguel de Icaza]

In general, a partial implementation is better than no implementation at
all.

When it comes to crypto, things are a little bit different, and we need to
be more careful.

What are the things that would not work from the spec?

Miguel



On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Martin Thwaites <monoforum at my2cents.co.uk>
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> In my latest endeavour to get the aspnetwebstack functioning on mono, I've
> found that the MachineKey.Protect and Unprotect classes aren't implemented.
>
> So, I've tried to put together something that would work, but not
> something that meets all the information supplied on MSDN page (e.g.
> framework options).
>
> My question is, I'm piggybacking on the MachineKey.Encrypt/Decrypt
> methods, is this sufficient to be accepted by the community?
>
> Here's the start of what I'm putting together.
>
>
> https://github.com/martinjt/mono/blob/mvc_fixes/mcs/class/System.Web/System.Web.Security/MachineKey.cs
>
> So, would a pull along these lines by accepted, or do all the requirements
> of the MSDN page need to be met?
>
> I'm not asking for a review of the pull right now as I need to check
> against coding standards, and add some more unit tests, just whether a half
> baked (but working) implementation is acceptable.
>
> Thanks,
> Martin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ximian.com/pipermail/mono-devel-list/attachments/20141016/8dacd18a/attachment-0001.html>