4 ms·
I'm pretty sure that Bitcoin has dealt with this issue for its base58 encoding. It might be worth checking if their algorithm is generalizable to other radix si
by kobeya 10y ago
I'm pretty sure that Bitcoin has dealt with this issue for its base58 encoding. It might be worth checking if their algorithm is generalizable to other radix sizes.
- deckar01 10y agoCheck out digit-array if you are interested in the generalized algorithm. The source code is commented with formal math notation for the operations. https://github.com/deckar01/digit-array/blob/master/README.md https://github.com/deckar01/digit-array/blob/master/README.m...
- CiPHPerCoder 10y agoThis doesn't appear to address the problem. At all. https://paragonie.com/blog/2016/06/constant-time-encoding-boring-cryptography-rfc-4648-and-you https://paragonie.com/blog/2016/06/constant-time-encoding-bo...
- deckar01 10y agoI misread your original comment. Nothing I posted is related to constant time encoding. I apologize for the confusion.
- CiPHPerCoder 10y agoIt's OK. I just want to be clear that my objection to base-122 is the same as my objection to base-N where N != 2^m for some integer m.
- CiPHPerCoder 10y agoNo, it hasn't. I sent a pull request that attempts to solve this problem for a C# implementation of Base58Check, but there's no way for me to reliably guarantee that data isn't leaking from the divison. https://github.com/adamcaudill/Base58Check/pull/3 https://github.com/adamcaudill/Base58Check/pull/3