I am trying to adapt the pure Lua implementation of the SecureHashAlgorithm found here for SHA2 512 instead of SHA2 256. When I try to use the adaptation, it does not give the correct answer.
Here is the adaptation:
--
-- UTILITY FUNCTIONS
--
-- transform a string of bytes in a string of hexadecimal digits
local function str2hexa (s)
local h = string.gsub(s, ".", function(c)
return string.format("%02x", string.byte(c))
end)
return h
end
-- transforms number 'l' into a big-endian sequence of 'n' bytes
--(coded as a string)
local function num2string(l, n)
local s = ""
for i = 1, n do
--most significant byte of l
local remainder = l % 256
s = string.char(remainder) .. s
--remove from l the bits we have already transformed
l = (l-remainder) / 256
end
return s
end
-- transform the big-endian sequence of eight bytes starting at
-- index 'i' in 's' into a number
local function s264num (s, i)
local n = 0
for i = i, i + 7 do
n = n*256 + string.byte(s, i)
end
return n
end
--
-- MAIN SECTION
--
-- FIRST STEP: INITIALIZE HASH VALUES
--(second 32 bits of the fractional parts of the square roots of the first 9th through 16th primes 23..53)
local HH = {}
local function initH512(H)
H = {0x6a09e667f3bcc908, 0xbb67ae8584caa73b, 0x3c6ef372fe94f82b, 0xa54ff53a5f1d36f1, 0x510e527fade682d1, 0x9b05688c2b3e6c1f, 0x1f83d9abfb41bd6b, 0x5be0cd19137e2179}
return H
end
-- SECOND STEP: INITIALIZE ROUND CONSTANTS
--(first 80 bits of the fractional parts of the cube roots of the first 80 primes 2..409)
local k = {
0x428a2f98d728ae22, 0x7137449123ef65cd, 0xb5c0fbcfec4d3b2f, 0xe9b5dba58189dbbc, 0x3956c25bf348b538,
0x59f111f1b605d019, 0x923f82a4af194f9b, 0xab1c5ed5da6d8118, 0xd807aa98a3030242, 0x12835b0145706fbe,
0x243185be4ee4b28c, 0x550c7dc3d5ffb4e2, 0x72be5d74f27b896f, 0x80deb1fe3b1696b1, 0x9bdc06a725c71235,
0xc19bf174cf692694, 0xe49b69c19ef14ad2, 0xefbe4786384f25e3, 0x0fc19dc68b8cd5b5, 0x240ca1cc77ac9c65,
0x2de92c6f592b0275, 0x4a7484aa6ea6e483, 0x5cb0a9dcbd41fbd4, 0x76f988da831153b5, 0x983e5152ee66dfab,
0xa831c66d2db43210, 0xb00327c898fb213f, 0xbf597fc7beef0ee4, 0xc6e00bf33da88fc2, 0xd5a79147930aa725,
0x06ca6351e003826f, 0x142929670a0e6e70, 0x27b70a8546d22ffc, 0x2e1b21385c26c926, 0x4d2c6dfc5ac42aed,
0x53380d139d95b3df, 0x650a73548baf63de, 0x766a0abb3c77b2a8, 0x81c2c92e47edaee6, 0x92722c851482353b,
0xa2bfe8a14cf10364, 0xa81a664bbc423001, 0xc24b8b70d0f89791, 0xc76c51a30654be30, 0xd192e819d6ef5218,
0xd69906245565a910, 0xf40e35855771202a, 0x106aa07032bbd1b8, 0x19a4c116b8d2d0c8, 0x1e376c085141ab53,
0x2748774cdf8eeb99, 0x34b0bcb5e19b48a8, 0x391c0cb3c5c95a63, 0x4ed8aa4ae3418acb, 0x5b9cca4f7763e373,
0x682e6ff3d6b2b8a3, 0x748f82ee5defb2fc, 0x78a5636f43172f60, 0x84c87814a1f0ab72, 0x8cc702081a6439ec,
0x90befffa23631e28, 0xa4506cebde82bde9, 0xbef9a3f7b2c67915, 0xc67178f2e372532b, 0xca273eceea26619c,
0xd186b8c721c0c207, 0xeada7dd6cde0eb1e, 0xf57d4f7fee6ed178, 0x06f067aa72176fba, 0x0a637dc5a2c898a6,
0x113f9804bef90dae, 0x1b710b35131c471b, 0x28db77f523047d84, 0x32caab7b40c72493, 0x3c9ebe0a15c9bebc,
0x431d67c49c100d4c, 0x4cc5d4becb3e42b6, 0x597f299cfc657e2a, 0x5fcb6fab3ad6faec, 0x6c44198c4a475817
}
-- THIRD STEP: PRE-PROCESSING (padding)
local function preprocess(toProcess, len)
--append a single '1' bit
--append K '0' bits, where K is the minimum number >= 0 such that L + 1 + K = 896mod1024
local extra = 128 - (len + 9) % 128
len = num2string(8 * len, 8)
toProcess = toProcess .. "\128" .. string.rep("\0", extra) .. len
assert(#toProcess % 128 == 0)
return toProcess
end
local function rrotate(rot, n)
return (rot >> n) | ((rot << 64 - n))
end
local function digestblock(msg, i, H)
local w = {}
for j = 1, 16 do w[j] = s264num(msg, i + (j - 1)*4) end
for j = 17, 80 do
local v = w[j - 15]
local s0 = rrotate(v, 1) ~ rrotate(v, 8) ~ (v >> 7)
v = w[j - 2]
w[j] = w[j - 16] + s0 + w[j - 7] + ((rrotate(v, 19) ~ rrotate(v, 61)) ~ (v >> 6))
end
local a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h = H[1], H[2], H[3], H[4], H[5], H[6], H[7], H[8]
for i = 1, 80 do
a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h = a , b , c , d , e , f , g , h
local s0 = rrotate(a, 28) ~ (rrotate(a, 34) ~ rrotate(a, 39))
local maj = ((a & b) ~ (a & c)) ~ (b & c)
local t2 = s0 + maj
local s1 = rrotate(e, 14) ~ (rrotate(e, 18) ~ rrotate(e, 41))
local ch = (e & f) ~ (~e & g)
local t1 = h + s1 + ch + k[i] + w[i]
h, g, f, e, d, c, b, a = g, f, e, d + t1, c, b, a, t1 + t2
end
H[1] = (H[1] + a)
H[2] = (H[2] + b)
H[3] = (H[3] + c)
H[4] = (H[4] + d)
H[5] = (H[5] + e)
H[6] = (H[6] + f)
H[7] = (H[7] + g)
H[8] = (H[8] + h)
end
local function finalresult512 (H)
-- Produce the final hash value:
return
str2hexa(num2string(H[1], 8)..num2string(H[2], 8)..num2string(H[3], 8)..num2string(H[4], 8)..
num2string(H[5], 8)..num2string(H[6], 8)..num2string(H[7], 8)..num2string(H[8], 8))
end
-- Returns the hash512 for the given string.
local function hash512 (msg)
msg = preprocess(msg, #msg)
local H = initH512(HH)
-- Process the message in successive 1024-bit (128 bytes) chunks:
for i = 1, #msg, 128 do
digestblock(msg, i, H)
end
return finalresult512(H)
end
Given hash512("a"):
Expect: 1f40fc92da241694750979ee6cf582f2d5d7d28e18335de05abc54d0560e0f5302860c652bf08d560252aa5e74210546f369fbbbce8c12cfc7957b2652fe9a75
Actual: e0b9623f2194cb81f2a62616a183edbe390be0d0b20430cadc3371efc237fa6bf7f8b48311f2fa249131c347fee3e8cde6acfdab286d648054541f92102cfc9c
I know that I am creating a message of the correct bit size (1024 bits) and also working in 1024-bit chunks, or at least I believe I am.
I am not sure if it has to do with the handling of the integers (the standard requires unsigned integers) or whether I made a mistake in one of the utility functions, or both. If it is indeed an issue with the handling of the integers, how would I go about taking care of the problem. I was able to resolve this when working on the 256-bit version of the adaptation by using mod 2^32 when working with numbers in the digestblock method. I attempted to do mod 2^64 and 2^63 with the 512-bit version and it does not correct the problem. I am stumped.
I should mention that I cannot use one of the many library implementations as I am using a sandboxed Lua that does not provide this access, which is why I need a pure lua implementation. Thanks in advance.
Unfortunately, after introducing integers in Lua 5.3 writing scripts for Lua becomes a more complicated task.
You must always think about transformations between integers and floating point numbers.
ALWAYS. Yes, that's boring.
One of your mistakes is an excellent example of this "dark corner of Lua".
local remainder = l % 256
s = string.char(remainder) .. s
--remove from l the bits we have already transformed
l = (l-remainder) / 256
Your value l is initially a 64-bit integer.
After cutting off its first byte l contains (64-8) = 56 bits, but now it's a floating point-number (with 53-bit precision, of course).
Possible solution: use l = l >> 8 or l = l // 256 instead of l = (l-remainder) / 256
Another mistake is using s264num(msg, i + (j - 1) * 4) instead of s264num(msg, i + (j - 1) * 8)
One more mistake is in the following line:
local extra = 128 - (len + 9) % 128
The correct code is
local extra = - (len + 17) % 128 + 8
(Please note that -a%m+b is not the same as b-a%m due to operator precedence)
After fixing these 3 mistakes your code works correctly.
I want to implement a 3 point crossover for genetic programming but I don't know how to do it and where to start.
My input is:
a = {(first pair), (second pair), ... etc.}
For example a = {(12345,67890), (09876,54321)} (those are numbers, not strings)
Output: Something like this:
Example: a_1 = {(12895), (67340)} also numbers.
Thanks for reply and sorry for my bad English.
Here is my quick implementation of k-point crossover for integers using mostly integer arithmetic. Starting with this, you can extend it to crossover your chromosomes of many pairs of integers using a loop.
math.randomseed(111)
-- math.randomseed(os.time())
a = 12345
b = 67890
len = 5 -- number of digits
function split(mum, dad, len, base)
local split = math.pow(base, math.random(len))
local son = math.floor(dad / split) * split + mum % split
local daughter = math.floor(mum / split) * split + dad % split
return son, daughter
end
function kpoint(mum, dad, len, base, k)
for i=1, k do
mum, dad = split(mum, dad, len, base)
end
return mum, dad
end
s, d = kpoint(a, b, len, 10, 3) -- 3 point crossover in base 10
print(s) -- 67395
print(d) -- 12840
-- binary, (crossover binary representation)
s, d = kpoint(tonumber("10001", 2), tonumber("10110", 2), 5, 2, 3)
print(s) -- 23 which is (10111) in base 2
print(d) -- 16 which is (10000) in base 2
-- binary, (crossover base 10, but interpret as binary)
s, d = kpoint(1101, 1010, 4, 10, 3)
print(s) -- 1001
print(d) -- 1110
I've been working on a project that renders a Mandelbrot fractal. For those of you who know, it is generated by iterating through the following function where c is the point on a complex plane:
function f(c, z) return z^2 + c end
Iterating through that function produces the following fractal (ignore the color):
When you change the function to this, (z raised to the third power)
function f(c, z) return z^3 + c end
the fractal should render like so (again, the color doesn't matter):
(source: uoguelph.ca)
However, when I raised z to the power of 3, I got an image extremely similar as to when you raise z to the power of 2. How can I make the fractal render correctly? This is the code where the iterations are done: (the variables real and imaginary simply scale the screen from -2 to 2)
--loop through each pixel, col = column, row = row
local real = (col - zoomCol) * 4 / width
local imaginary = (row - zoomRow) * 4 / width
local z, c, iter = 0, 0, 0
while math.sqrt(z^2 + c^2) <= 2 and iter < maxIter do
local zNew = z^2 - c^2 + real
c = 2*z*c + imaginary
z = zNew
iter = iter + 1
end
So I recently decided to remake a Mandelbrot fractal generator, and it was MUCH more successful than my attempt last time, as my programming skills have increased with practice.
I decided to generalize the mandelbrot function using recursion for anyone who wants it. So, for example, you can do f(z, c) z^2 + c or f(z, c) z^3 + c
Here it is for anyone that may need it:
function raise(r, i, cr, ci, pow)
if pow == 1 then
return r + cr, i + ci
end
return raise(r*r-i*i, 2*r*i, cr, ci, pow - 1)
end
and it's used like this:
r, i = raise(r, i, CONSTANT_REAL_PART, CONSTANT_IMAG_PART, POWER)
For example I need number with minimum 3 digit
"512" --> 512
"24" --> 24.0
"5" --> 5.00
One option is write small function. Using answers here for my case it will be something like this
function f(value, w)
local p = math.ceil(math.log10(value))
local prec = value <= 1 and w - 1 or p > w and 0 or w - p
return string.format('%.' .. prec .. 'f', value)
end
print(f(12, 3))
But may be it is possible just using string.format() or any other simple way?
Ok, it seems this case beyond the string.format power. Thanks to #Schollii, this is my current variant
function f(value, w)
local p = math.ceil(math.log10(value))
local prec = value <= 1 and w - 1 or p > w and 0 or w - p
return string.format('%.' .. prec .. 'f', value)
end
print(f(12, 3))
There is no format code specifically for this since string.format uses printf minus a few codes (like * which would hace simplified the solution I give below). So you have to implement yourself, for example:
function f(num, w)
-- get number of digits before decimal
local intWidth = math.ceil(math.log10(num))
-- if intWidth > w then ... end -- may need this
local fmt='%'..w..'.' .. (w-intWidth) .. 'f'
return string.format(fmt, num)
end
print(f(12, 4))
print(f(12, 3))
print(f(12, 2))
print(f(512, 3))
print(f(24, 3))
print(f(5, 3))
You should probably handle case where integer part doesn't fit in field width given (return ceil or floor?).
You can't. Maximum you can reach - specify floating point precision or digit number, but you can't force output to be like your example. Lua uses C like printf with few limitations reference. Look here for full specifiers list link. Remember unsupported ones.
Writing a function would be the best and only solution, especially as your task looks strange, as it doesn't count decimal dot.
I am playing a little bit with Lua.
I came across the following code snippet that have an unexpected behavior:
a = 3;
b = 5;
c = a-- * b++; // some computation
print(a, b, c);
Lua runs the program without any error but does not print 2 6 15 as expected. Why ?
-- starts a single line comment, like # or // in other languages.
So it's equivalent to:
a = 3;
b = 5;
c = a
LUA doesn't increment and decrement with ++ and --. -- will instead start a comment.
There isn't and -- and ++ in lua.
so you have to use a = a + 1 or a = a -1 or something like that
If you want 2 6 15 as the output, try this code:
a = 3
b = 5
c = a * b
a = a - 1
b = b + 1
print(a, b, c)
This will give
3 5 3
because the 3rd line will be evaluated as c = a.
Why? Because in Lua, comments starts with --. Therefore, c = a-- * b++; // some computation is evaluated as two parts:
expression: c = a
comment: * b++; //// some computation
There are 2 problems in your Lua code:
a = 3;
b = 5;
c = a-- * b++; // some computation
print(a, b, c);
One, Lua does not currently support incrementation. A way to do this is:
c = a - 1 * b + 1
print(a, b, c)
Two, -- in Lua is a comment, so using a-- just translates to a, and the comment is * b++; // some computation.
Three, // does not work in Lua, use -- for comments.
Also it's optional to use ; at the end of every line.
You can do the following:
local default = 0
local max = 100
while default < max do
default = default + 1
print(default)
end
EDIT: Using SharpLua in C# incrementing/decrementing in lua can be done in shorthand like so:
a+=1 --increment by some value
a-=1 --decrement by some value
In addition, multiplication/division can be done like so:
a*=2 --multiply by some value
a/=2 --divide by some value
The same method can be used if adding, subtracting, multiplying or dividing one variable by another, like so:
a+=b
a-=b
a/=b
a*=b
This is much simpler and tidier and I think a lot less complicated, but not everybody will share my view.
Hope this helps!