diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'secure/lib/libcipher/README')
| -rw-r--r-- | secure/lib/libcipher/README | 98 |
1 files changed, 98 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/secure/lib/libcipher/README b/secure/lib/libcipher/README new file mode 100644 index 0000000..53ea229 --- /dev/null +++ b/secure/lib/libcipher/README @@ -0,0 +1,98 @@ + + FreeSec - NetBSD libcrypt replacement + + David Burren <davidb@werj.com.au> + Release 1.0, March 1994 + + Document ref: $Id: README,v 1.1 1994/09/07 08:55:24 g89r4222 Exp $ + + +Description +=========== +This library is a drop-in replacement for the libcrypt used in U.S. copies +of NetBSD, duplicating that library's functionality. A suite of verification +and benchmark tools is provided. + +FreeSec 1.0 is an original implementation of the DES algorithm and the +crypt(3) interfaces used in Unix-style operating systems. It was produced +in Australia and as such is not covered by U.S. export restrictions (at +least for copies that remain outside the U.S.). + + +History +======= +An earlier version of the FreeSec library was built using the UFC-crypt +package that is distributed as part of the GNU library. UFC-crypt did not +support the des_cipher() or des_setkey() functions, nor the new-style +crypt with long keys. These were implemented in FreeSec 0.2, but at least +one bug remained, where encryption would only succeed if either the salt +or the plaintext was zero. Because of its heritage FreeSec 0.2 was covered +by the GNU Library Licence. + +FreeSec 1.0 is an original implementation by myself, and has been tested +against the verification suite I'd been using with FreeSec 0.2 (this is not +encumbered by any licence). FreeSec 1.0 is covered by a Berkeley-style +licence, which better fits into the *BSD hierarchy than the earlier GNU +licence. + + +Why should you use FreeSec? +=========================== +FreeSec is intended as a replacement for the U.S.-only NetBSD libcrypt, +to act as a baseline for encryption functionality. + +Some other packages (such as Eric Young's libdes package) are faster and +more complete than FreeSec, but typically have different licencing +arrangements. While some applications will justify the use of these +packages, the idea here is that everyone should have access to *at least* +the functionality of FreeSec. + + +Performance of FreeSec 1.0 +========================== +I compare below the performance of three libcrypt implementations. As can be +seen, it's between the U.S. library and UFC-crypt. While the performance of +FreeSec 1.0 is good enough to keep me happy for now, I hope to improve it in +future versions. I was interested to note that while UFC-crypt is faster on +a 386, hardware characteristics can have markedly different effects on each +implementation. + + +386DX40, 128k cache | U.S. BSD | FreeSec 1.0 | FreeSec 0.2 +CFLAGS=-O2 | | | +========================+===============+===============+================== +crypt (alternate keys) | 317 | 341 | 395 + crypt/sec | | | +------------------------+---------------+---------------+------------------ +crypt (constant key) | 317 | 368 | 436 + crypt/sec | | | +------------------------+---------------+---------------+------------------ +des_cipher( , , , 1) | 6037 | 7459 | 3343 + blocks/sec | | | +------------------------+---------------+---------------+------------------ +des_cipher( , , , 25) | 8871 | 9627 | 15926 + blocks/sec | | | + +Notes: The results tabled here are the average over 10 runs. + The entry/exit code for FreeSec 0.2's des_cipher() is particularly + inefficient, thus the anomalous result for single encryptions. + + +As an experiment using a machine with a larger register set and an +obscenely fast CPU, I obtained the following results: + + 60 MHz R4400 | FreeSec 1.0 | FreeSec 0.2 + ========================+================================= + crypt (alternate keys) | 2545 | 2702 + crypt/sec | | + ------------------------+--------------------------------- + crypt (constant key) | 2852 | 2981 + crypt/sec | | + ------------------------+--------------------------------- + des_cipher( , , , 1) | 56443 | 21409 + blocks/sec | | + ------------------------+--------------------------------- + des_cipher( , , , 25) | 82531 | 18276 + blocks/sec | | + +Obviously your mileage will vary with your hardware and your compiler... |
