in reply to Anything faster then Crypt::Lite?

I bet Crypt::Blowfish is faster and I'm pretty sure it'll be more secure too. Crypt::Lite is doing its work in Perl, which seems pretty foolish to me - C is obviously a better tool for this kind of number-crunching.

Why not give it a try? Put together a benchmark with Benchmark and try out a few alternatives.

-sam

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Anything faster then Crypt::Lite?
by ikegami (Patriarch) on Jul 27, 2006 at 17:39 UTC
    Crypt::Blowfish shouldn't be used directly (since it can only encode an 8 byte string, no more no less). It should be used via Crypt::CBC (which handles padding, and uses chaining for a more secure result than encrpyting every 8 bytes chunk with the same key). 
    use Crypt::CBC ();

my $cipher = Crypt::CBC->new(
   -key    => ...,
   -cipher => 'Blowfish',
);

my $plaintext  = 'This data is hush hush';
my $ciphertext = $cipher->encrypt($plaintext);

    [download]
    use Crypt::CBC ();

my $cipher = Crypt::CBC->new(
   -key    => ...,
   -cipher => 'Blowfish',
);

my $ciphertext = ...;
my $plaintext  = $cipher->decrypt($ciphertext);

    [download]
[reply]
[d/l]
[select]
Re^2: Anything faster then Crypt::Lite?
by leocharre (Priest) on Jul 27, 2006 at 18:47 UTC

    Sam, I'm actually using Benchmark::Timer to get some numbers on these things. Super helpful, quick to implement.

    ( And I'm using HTML::Template.. which is probably one of the most useful modules I've ever tried out. Whomever designed that has my hummility ;-) - I'm thinking to use it more and more. )

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom