rfc6979: allow the use of non-block_api-backed hashes#1360
Open
baloo wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
Conversation
Member
Author
|
cc @daxpedda |
Contributor
|
I believe this was done mainly to avoid Ergo this looks fine to me 👍. Thank you for the heads-up! |
baloo
force-pushed
the
baloo/push-yzwqxrknnmvv
branch
from
03dbe21 to
bdd748c
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When #1076 was introduced, it moved the implementation to use block_api-backed hashes only.
This made sense at the time, because all the hashes used so far were backed by block_api.
This situation changed with RustCrypto/hashes#849 where sha3 is no longer backed by the block_api.
This PR is essentially a revert of RustCrypto/hashes#849 that brings back the previous implementation of rfc6979, using SimpleHmacReset.
This was tested in downstream crates (k256 and rpgp).
See discussion in #1076 (comment) and below