[Cryptech Core] Questions regarding existing documentation

Joachim Strömbergson joachim at secworks.se
Tue Aug 11 07:31:38 UTC 2015

Hash: SHA256


(Thanks for doing the documentation, wiki work Heather, greatly

Randy Bush wrote:
> [ my personal opinion ]
> swedes are sun-struck, so may be slow to respond.

Considering how the weather turned out this summer, most swedes wish
they had been sun-struck. ;-)

>> 1. With the Novena board as the prototype of choice, do we
>> want/need the documentation on the TerasIC C5G Board? (query re: 
>> http://trac.cryptech.is/wiki/CoretestHashesC5G)
> imiho, no

Do we remove or archive?

>> 3. The following git repositories listed on the top level git 
>> repositories page do not have README files. Are these repositories
>> still in use, and if so, who will write the README files for them?

I can write READMEs for the following:

>> doc/design doc/presentations test/external_avalanche_entropy 
>> user/js/test/novena_eim_base

At least a short blurb describing the purpose of the repos and contents
as of today. The last repo, user/js/test/novena_eim_base we could simply
ditch however. My test stuff and I can just keep it local.

>> 4. Having the list of git repositories in one place is a good
>> thing. Is there any reason not to link to specific repositories
>> and/or READMEs in the body of the documentation on the wiki?

imho, no - they could very well be linked to.

>> 5. Not all git repositories shown in the trac sitemap are listed on
>> the master Git Repositories page. Is there any reason not to
>> include these on the master page for a single complete list of
>> active repositories? Examples: GitRepositories/core/aes 
>> GitRepositories/core/avalanche_entropy GitRepositories/core/chacha 
>> GitRepositories/core/cipher ... These and other repositories can be
>> found when going to to sub-pages like GitRepositories/core or
>> GitRepositories/comm. I do not propose removing the sub-pages, but
>> it seems odd to have a top level page that doesn't have everything,
>> unless there's a reason for it (i.e., those are the pages someone
>> wanting to play around with cryptech will need, whereas the other
>> pages might be archival at this point).

imho all repos, esp the ones not used for testing/experimental work and
personal repos (under js/ paul/ etc) should all be as easy to see and
find by interested people as possible. So if we have a master page of
repos (which is a good thing, imho), then all those repos should be
found there.

The ones listed above (aes, chacha etc) are all used by the Cryptech
FPGA design and should not be hidden away.

(If I understood what you asked about.)

> entropy and randomness are non-terminating obsessions for folk
> working in this area.  we should document the trng on each board as
> part of the product design page(s).  we have not done a good novena
> platform page, o overview o tech o repos o upper layer repos (e.g.
> where do ggm & lacnic put their rpki?) o install and use recipe(s) o
> logistics (how to acquire parts and assemble)

I have a (pre) alpha version of a paper with detailed information on the
TRNG. Do we want to make it into wiki page(es)?

- -- 
Med vänlig hälsning, Yours

Joachim Strömbergson - Alltid i harmonisk svängning.
 Joachim Strömbergson          Secworks AB          joachim at secworks.se
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/


More information about the Core mailing list