I agree, however this isn't for use in checking a password that a user supplied. It's for listing passwords that are stored in the database for an application that manages host information. Which is why I am using Blowfish to encrypt them instead of doing a SHA1 or MD5 hash.

Also in this database are IP addresses that have been stored in a packed() format (by a previous developer). So my question also applies to them, and is not just strictly for the passwords.

IE:
The ip needs to be unpacked when it is read from the database, and then packed again before it is stored. So that I can keep my CDBI code transparent to the fact that this stuff is going on behind the scenes:

# to find the row that has this ip.
my $obj = MyModule->search(ip => "127.0.0.1");

# or to print out the ip
print $obj->ip;

# or to update the ip...
$obj->ip("192.168.0.1");
$obj->update();
[download]

I suppose I can always make methods like decode_ip, encode_ip, encrypt_password, etc... I just thought it'd be good to have it part of my CDBI class to make sure that the data gets written into the database in the correctly (ie: no passwords accidentally stored unecrypted because of a forgotten method call)

For IP addresses, I would have them inflate to a NetAddr::IP object:

use NetAddr::IP;
__PACKAGE__->has_a( ip_addr => 'NetAddr::IP' 
    inflate => sub { 
        my $packed = shift;
        # Unpack the IP addr here into $ip and $netmask
        return NetAddr::IP->new( $ip, $netmask );
    }, 
    deflate => sub { 
        my $addr = shift;
        # Take the NetAddr::IP instance and pack it 
        # into $packed
        return $packed;
    }, 
);
[download]

Using Class::DBI = Good
Using Class::DBI with inflation of many fields to objects = Better (usually)

----
I wanted to explore how Perl's closures can be manipulated, and ended up creating an object system by accident.
-- Schemer

: () { :|:& };:

Note: All code is untested, unless otherwise stated