Implement Micrososoft.Bcl.Cryptography without System.Security.Cryptography.Algorithms #85683
+59
−15
Conversation
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
ghost
added
the
|
Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-security, @bartonjs, @vcsjones Issue DetailsThis removes our use of Instead, use the in-box HMAC and hashing capabilities. We could keep using Contributes to #85641 /cc @ViktorHofer
|
bartonjs
approved these changes
May 2, 2023
This was referenced May 3, 2023
ViktorHofer
approved these changes
May 3, 2023
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
3 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This removes our use of
IncrementalHashinMicrosoft.Bcl.Cryptographyso that we can remove the dependency onSystem.Security.Cryptography.Algorithms.Instead, use the in-box HMAC and hashing capabilities.
We could keep using
IncrementalHashfor thenetstandard2.0builds, but it would only give a small improvement for performance. Since this is a compatibility package, I'm not terribly worried about it. The in-box SP800108 will use the best-available APIs. I'd rather avoid yet-another pivot for target framework for this project.Contributes to #85641
/cc @ViktorHofer