Total re-design of Factory?

Aperta
  • Qualcosa non va?
#189 0 commenti 0 reazioni 0 assegnatari Vedi su GitHub

I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno

Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.

Valutazione

Difficoltà
5/5
Tempo stimato
Più di una settimana
Idoneità per principianti
25/100
Tipo di issue
Refactoring
Chiarezza
Abbastanza chiara
Stato di attività
Attiva
Stack tecnologico
rust
Ambito
backend-api-design, cryptography

Direzione di ricerca

Start by reviewing the current factory crate and traits.rs, focusing on allocator constraints and trait object compatibility. Compare the existing design with the stated goals for algorithm abstraction and name-to-object mapping. Done means proposing a redesign that addresses those goals and identifies the intended std or no_std support level.

Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.

Descrizione

We have a number of tickets open about factories. I think we agree that the current design of the factory basically needs to be deleted and re-designed from scratch.

Design goals:

  1. Provide an abstraction layer that keeps algorithm-specific code out of calling applications. For example, if an application needs a signature algorithm, it should be possible to build it abstractly so that the developer doesn't know or care whether it's ML-DSA-44, ML-DSA-87, ECDSA-P256, or something else. That essentially means that the abstraction layer should operate at the level of traits so that you only need to know that you're holding a &dyn Signer, or similar.
  2. Provide a string-to-object mapping; ie something that behaves something like let signer = SignerFactory::new_from_name("ML-DSA-65");
  3. That scaffolding will make it easy to build protocols like X.509, CMS, JWT, CWT, TLS (if we go there) because they just need a mapping table from however that protocol names algorithms (OIDs, codepoints, etc) to our canonical internal name, and then they can use the factory. In particular, that does separation of layers by keeping algorithm-specific junk out of the protocol layer.

We get to decide at what level of std, no_std+alloc, no_std, no_alloc we want the factory to be functional at. The current factory is attempting to be operable without an allocator, and this is the root of all the complexity. Doing this at the no_std+alloc level would be much simpler because then you'd have access to Box, which would make the whole thing easier.

PS -- if we trash the current factory crate, then that might soften the requirement that our traits.rs all need to be dyn-compatible, which would allow us to roll-back some of the hideous designs, like the fact that Hash's hash() isn't a static, but instead requires SHA256::new().hash(&msg); when it really should be SHA256::hash(&msg); for no good reason except that the latter is not dyn-compatible.

Lingua principale
Rust
Stelle
25
Fork
18
Merge medio
56m
PR unite (30g)
1

Preparare l'ambiente

Come iniziare

  1. Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
  2. Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
  3. Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
  4. Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.

Altre issue di bcgit/bc-rust

Tutte le issue di bcgit/bc-rust

Issue simili

Altre issue su Rust

Ricevi le nuove issue nella tua casella

Un breve riepilogo di issue GitHub adatte ai principianti.