11–20 of 64 posts
keydir = *++argv; if (!keydir) die_usage();
if (*x == 'v') { if (flagverbose >= 2) flagverbose = 3; else flagverbose = 2; continue; }
Is TweetNaCl deliberately 32-bit or LLP64 only? One of the first lines is typedef unsigned long u32; but on 64-bit LP64 systems (like Linux), long is 64-bits. See http://tweetnacl.cr.yp.to/20140427/tweetnacl.c
Yes, TweetNaCl is. TweetNaCl's goal is to be auditable, not to be portable. On the other hand, TinySSH actually includes a configuration mechanism to detect integer sizes, and modifies TweetNaCl accordingly, so TinySSH is not 32-bit/LLP64 only.
I find use of TweetNaCl curious. For curve25519, why wouldn't one use http://code.google.com/p/curve25519-donna/ instead? djb's cryptography is great, but djb's implementations leave something to be desired.
I find use of TweetNaCl curious. For curve25519, why wouldn't one use http://code.google.com/p/curve25519-donna/ instead? djb's cryptography is great, but djb's implementations leave something to be desired.
So, I don't see the problem here. If these guys had tried to cobble together a replacement for NaCl out of pieces like the curve25519-donna code, that would be a problem, because there's more potential to screw that up.
Daemontools and inetd? May I ask where the systemd socket activation support is?
Which ssh clients can connect to this? For example, can putty connect to this?
Curious as to whether something like this would be good for embedded work, as I'm working on a "modern" HP 200LX[0] running RetroBSD[1] possibly, all off a PIC micro controller (!) and want to work out how to get some form of SSH into it. Will be interesting to attempt to port it regardless of what happens though! ---- [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_200LX [1] http://retrobsd.org/wiki/doku.php
https://matt.ucc.asn.au/dropbear/dropbear.html
Quick check shows that both compile to about 220K without any tuning on x86_64. While I wouldn't use that figure as serious comparison, it shows that they are in the same ballpark in size.
It sounds like it's small enough perhaps for a direct port to a safe language like rust, that would be interesting (to me at least).
How is code like below "easily auditable"? keydir = *++argv; if (!keydir) die_usage(); or if (*x == 'v') { if (flagverbose >= 2) flagverbose = 3; else flagverbose = 2; continue; } why put multiple statements on the same line if you have nothing to hide?[1] [1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/CodingStyle
(Not that I would have written either line that way, mind you. But there's no real challenge understanding them.)