RSA Classes?

Hi,

I have been searching through the MSDN for quite a while, trying to find
some RSA PKE implimentation as part of the Windows API / MFC. I have not had
any luck with this so far, could anyone suggest any places to look?

--
- Mark Randall
http://zetech.swehli.com

Mark Randall wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been searching through the MSDN for quite a while, trying to
> find some RSA PKE implimentation as part of the Windows API / MFC. I
> have not had any luck with this so far, could anyone suggest any
> places to look?

See CryptoAPI.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...ic_provider.asp

should get you started.

Note that CryptoAPI is vendor and algorithm neutral, so it tends to be a
bit... cryptic.

-cd

"Mark Randall" <markyr@REMOVETHISgoogle.ANDTHIScom> wrote in message
news:uAoQdIWbFHA.1152@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> I have been searching through the MSDN for quite a while, trying to find
> some RSA PKE implimentation as part of the Windows API / MFC. I have not
> had any luck with this so far, could anyone suggest any places to look?

I see Carl has already pointed you at the Crypto API. You might also want to
take a look at this freeware:

http://www.eskimo.com/~weidai/cryptlib.html

Regards,
Will

Thankyou William, and Carl.

I have started looking through the CryptoAPI (someone seemed to put the US
target list on that page you linked Carl???) which, as you said... is
horribly, horribly cryptic. I have also taken a look at that lib that you
mentioned William, which looks like it needs hammering together.

I will take a look at both in more detail, thankyou.

--
- Mark Randall
http://zetech.swehli.com

"William DePalo [MVP VC++]" <willd.no.spam@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:eYiXl$WbFHA.3200@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> "Mark Randall" <markyr@REMOVETHISgoogle.ANDTHIScom> wrote in message
> news:uAoQdIWbFHA.1152@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... 
>
> I see Carl has already pointed you at the Crypto API. You might also want
> to take a look at this freeware:
>
> http://www.eskimo.com/~weidai/cryptlib.html
>
> Regards,
> Will
>
>

>I have started looking through the CryptoAPI (someone seemed to put the US
>target list on that page you linked Carl???) which, as you said... is
>horribly, horribly cryptic. I have also taken a look at that lib that you
>mentioned William, which looks like it needs hammering together.

Don't forget this is cryptography you're dealing with. Terrible
documentation goes with the territory - you can't have any Tom, Dick,
or Harry being able to make use of it can you ;)

While I don't pretend to be an expert at them or the subject, I have
used both for fairly straight-forward things, and neither are rocket
science once you manage to get through the awful documentation to some
code that works. If anything, the crypto++ libraries may be preferable
- you may find some customers who won't accept MS's CryptoAPI.

Dave

"David Lowndes" wrote (or rather, typed):
If anything, the crypto++ libraries may be preferable
> - you may find some customers who won't accept MS's CryptoAPI.

Would that be because google is flooded with hundreds of pages about NSA
backdoors?

--
- Mark Randall
http://zetech.swehli.com

>> - you may find some customers who won't accept MS's CryptoAPI.
>
>Would that be because google is flooded with hundreds of pages about NSA
>backdoors?

I don't know the *real* reasons - it could be bad rumours, the
not-invented-here syndrome, screw MS, etc etc., but some customers
won't validate solutions using CryptoAPI. I had to re-write something
that we'd done with CryptoAPI using the Crypto++ library instead.

I guess it depends who your customers are. If they won't care tuppence
who wrote the underlying security code, and you won't need any stamp
of approval from a security body choose whichever you feel is the most
straight-forward.

Dave