Related
I am trying to sign a byte array in python by the same way as it happens on the crypto library with the secp256k1 from NodeJS
This is the code on NodeJS/Browser:
const secp256k1 = require('secp256k1')
var message = [2, 118, 145, 101, 166, 249, 149, 13, 2, 58, 65, 94, 230, 104, 184, 11, 185, 107, 92, 154, 226, 3, 93, 151, 189, 251, 68, 243, 86, 23, 90, 68, 255, 111, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 187, 226, 2, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 9, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 4, 0, 84, 101, 115, 116, 105, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0];
var private_key_buffer = [122, 241, 114, 103, 51, 227, 157, 149, 221, 126, 157, 173, 31, 111, 43, 118, 208, 71, 123, 59, 96, 68, 57, 177, 53, 59, 151, 188, 36, 167, 40, 68]
const signature = secp256k1.sign(SHA3BUF(message), private_key_buffer)
This is my implementation in python:
import hashlib
import ecdsa
message = bytearray([2, 118, 145, 101, 166, 249, 149, 13, 2, 58, 65, 94, 230, 104, 184, 11, 185, 107, 92, 154, 226, 3, 93, 151, 189, 251, 68, 243, 86, 23, 90, 68, 255, 111, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 187, 226, 2, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 9, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 4, 0, 84, 101, 115, 116, 105, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0])
private_key_buffer = bytearray([122, 241, 114, 103, 51, 227, 157, 149, 221, 126, 157, 173, 31, 111, 43, 118, 208, 71, 123, 59, 96, 68, 57, 177, 53, 59, 151, 188, 36, 167, 40, 68])
signinKey = ecdsa.SigningKey.from_string(private_key_buffer, curve=ecdsa.SECP256k1)
signature = signinKey.sign_deterministic(message, hashfunc=hashlib.sha3_256)
but by some reason, the signature I get in the javascript code is diferent from the python code:
java script signature: [23, 54, 64, 151, 95, 33, 200, 66, 246, 166, 144, 182, 81, 179, 124, 223, 250, 50, 137, 169, 45, 181, 197, 74, 225, 207, 116, 125, 50, 241, 38, 52, 118, 215, 252, 94, 191, 154, 200, 195, 152, 73, 1, 197, 158, 24, 72, 177, 118, 39, 241, 82, 114, 107, 25, 106, 67, 205, 202, 4, 7, 57, 82, 237]
python script signature: [213, 69, 97, 237, 85, 226, 217, 201, 51, 14, 220, 92, 105, 59, 54, 92, 87, 88, 233, 147, 191, 15, 21, 86, 134, 202, 205, 223, 83, 134, 70, 39, 10, 19, 147, 20, 181, 180, 88, 103, 79, 55, 144, 98, 84, 2, 224, 127, 192, 200, 200, 250, 170, 129, 67, 99, 163, 72, 92, 253, 109, 108, 104, 206]
So how can I make the python code output the same signature of the JS code?
For the deterministic ECDSA as described in RFC6979, a hash algorithm is used in two places: One algorithm (H1) is used for hashing the message, another (H2) for determining the k-value. k is a parameter within the signature algorithm, whose role is described e.g. in RFC6979, section 2.4 or also here. For the non-deterministic variant k is determined randomly, for the deterministic variant as described in RFC6979.
RFC6979 doesn't specify that H1 and H2 must be different, see RFC6979, section 3.6. Nevertheless, it makes sense that an implementation offers the possibility to define both hash algorithms separately.
The ECDSA implementation of Python generally allows two different hash algorithms to be applied. Before this is shown in the 2nd case, the following variant, which correponds to the posted Python-code, applies the same hash algorithm H1 = H2 = SHA3-256. The hash algorithm specified in the sign_deterministic-method defines both H1 and H2:
import hashlib
import ecdsa
message = b'Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.'
private_key_buffer = bytearray.fromhex('0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001')
sk = ecdsa.SigningKey.from_string(private_key_buffer, curve=ecdsa.SECP256k1)
signature = sk.sign_deterministic(message, hashfunc=hashlib.sha3_256)
print(signature.hex())
The signature is:
r = 88ecdbc6a2762e7ad1160f7c984cd61385ff07982280538dd7d2103be2dce720
s = c1487df9feab7afda6e6115bdd4d9c5316e3f917a3235a5e47aee09624491304
The next variant uses H1 = SHA3-256 for hashing the message and H2 = SHA256 for k-determination. This is possible by replacing the sign_deterministic-method with the sign_digest_deterministic-method, which allows separate hashing of the message with H1. The hash algorithm specified in the sign_digest_deterministic-method then only defines H2:
import hashlib
import ecdsa
message = b'Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.'
private_key_buffer = bytearray.fromhex('0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001')
digest = hashlib.sha3_256()
digest.update(message)
hash = digest.digest()
sk = ecdsa.SigningKey.from_string(private_key_buffer, curve=ecdsa.SECP256k1)
signature = sk.sign_digest_deterministic(hash, hashfunc=hashlib.sha256)
print(signature.hex())
The signature is:
r = 64b10395957b78d3bd3db279e5fa4ebee36b58dd1becace4bc2d7e3a04cf6259
s = 19f1eee7495064ac679d7b64ab7213b921b650c0a3746f2938ffeede0ff1f2e8
The following code is functionally identical to the posted NodeJS-code:
const secp256k1 = require('secp256k1')
const sha3 = require('js-sha3')
message = 'Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.'
private_key_buffer = Buffer.from('0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001','hex')
digest = sha3.sha3_256;
hash = Buffer.from(digest(message), 'hex')
signature = secp256k1.sign(hash, private_key_buffer)
console.log(signature.signature.toString('hex'))
and generates the same signature as in the 2nd case, i.e. apparently H2 = SHA256. I didn't find a way to change this to SHA3-256 without much effort. However, according to the documentation it is possible to replace the default generator that implements RFC6979. This should also change H2, but could be more expensive.
In summary: The simplest way to fix the incompatibility of both codes
is to change the Python-code as described above in the 2nd case, i.e. to use the sign_digest_deterministic-method. The message is then hashed with SHA3-256, the k-generation takes place with SHA256. A more expensive alternative would be to implement an own generator to enable k-generation with SHA3-256 in the NodeJS-code. Or of course, you try to find another ECDSA-library for the NodeJS-code that allows you to define H1 and H2 separately, analogous to the Python-code.
Update:
Canonical signature: If (r,s) is a signature, then (r, -s mod n) = (r, n - s) is also a valid signature. Here n is the order of the base point. If in case s > n/2 the part -s mod n = n - s is used instead of s, then the result for the signature is unambiguous and is limited to the area below n/2. This is called canonical signature, which is particularly relevant for the Bitcoin topic and also frequently used for test vectors.
I am using OpenCV 2.4.9 Python knnMatch where the query descriptors come directly from detectAndCompute and are formatted correctly, but the train descriptors will come from a list I made in a different program.
When I get the descriptors from my other program, they look like:
[array([ 14, 21, 234, 147, 215, 115, 190, 215, 94, 231, 31, 34, 200,
124, 127, 104, 255, 123, 179, 147, 180, 240, 61, 226, 111, 95,
159, 131, 151, 127, 253, 231], dtype=uint8), array([162, 150, 101, 219, 117, 151, 173, 113, 93, 29, 81, 23, 232,
13, 60, 133, 221, 2, 147, 165, 242, 188, 120, 221, 39, 26,
154, 194, 87, 140, 245, 252], dtype=uint8)]
That would be 2 descriptors.
How can I format these so I do not get the "OpenCV Error: Unsupported format or combination of formats" error when matching these descriptors with those coming straight out of detectAndCompute? I have tried using np.asarray(list, np.float32) to no avail. If I do:
[[d for d in des] for des in list] with list as the train descriptors then the two lists will LOOK the same but I get the same error!
list = [[d for d in des] for des in list]
list = np.asarray(list, np.uint8)
for d in list:
for x in d:
x = x.astype(np.uint8)
I have written a small Cython tool for in-place sorting of structures exposing the buffer protocol in Python. It's a work in progress; please forgive any mistakes. This is just for me to learn.
In my set of unit tests, I am working on testing the in-place sort across many different kinds of buffer-exposing data structures, each with many types of underlying data contained in them. I can verify it is working as expected for most cases, but the case of bytearray is very peculiar.
If you take it for granted that my imported module b in the code below is just performing a straightforward heap sort in Cython, in-place on the bytearray, then the following code sample shows the issue:
In [42]: a #NumPy array
Out[42]: array([ 9, 148, 115, 208, 243, 197], dtype=uint8)
In [43]: byt = bytearray(a)
In [44]: byt
Out[44]: bytearray(b'\t\x94s\xd0\xf3\xc5')
In [45]: list(byt)
Out[45]: [9, 148, 115, 208, 243, 197]
In [46]: byt1 = copy.deepcopy(byt)
In [47]: b.heap_sort(byt1)
In [48]: list(byt1)
Out[48]: [148, 197, 208, 243, 9, 115]
In [49]: list(bytearray(sorted(byt)))
Out[49]: [9, 115, 148, 197, 208, 243]
What you can see is that when using sorted, the values are iterated and treated like Python integers for the purpose of sorting, then placed back into a new bytearray.
But the in-place sort, in line 47-48 shows that the bytes are being interpreted as signed integers, and are sorted by their 2's complement value, putting number >= 128, since they are negative, towards the left.
I can confirm it by running over the whole range 0-255:
In [50]: byt = bytearray(range(0,256))
In [51]: b.heap_sort(byt)
In [52]: list(byt)
Out[52]:
[128,
129,
130,
131,
132,
133,
134,
135,
136,
137,
138,
139,
140,
141,
142,
143,
144,
145,
146,
147,
148,
149,
150,
151,
152,
153,
154,
155,
156,
157,
158,
159,
160,
161,
162,
163,
164,
165,
166,
167,
168,
169,
170,
171,
172,
173,
174,
175,
176,
177,
178,
179,
180,
181,
182,
183,
184,
185,
186,
187,
188,
189,
190,
191,
192,
193,
194,
195,
196,
197,
198,
199,
200,
201,
202,
203,
204,
205,
206,
207,
208,
209,
210,
211,
212,
213,
214,
215,
216,
217,
218,
219,
220,
221,
222,
223,
224,
225,
226,
227,
228,
229,
230,
231,
232,
233,
234,
235,
236,
237,
238,
239,
240,
241,
242,
243,
244,
245,
246,
247,
248,
249,
250,
251,
252,
253,
254,
255,
0,
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10,
11,
12,
13,
14,
15,
16,
17,
18,
19,
20,
21,
22,
23,
24,
25,
26,
27,
28,
29,
30,
31,
32,
33,
34,
35,
36,
37,
38,
39,
40,
41,
42,
43,
44,
45,
46,
47,
48,
49,
50,
51,
52,
53,
54,
55,
56,
57,
58,
59,
60,
61,
62,
63,
64,
65,
66,
67,
68,
69,
70,
71,
72,
73,
74,
75,
76,
77,
78,
79,
80,
81,
82,
83,
84,
85,
86,
87,
88,
89,
90,
91,
92,
93,
94,
95,
96,
97,
98,
99,
100,
101,
102,
103,
104,
105,
106,
107,
108,
109,
110,
111,
112,
113,
114,
115,
116,
117,
118,
119,
120,
121,
122,
123,
124,
125,
126,
127]
I know this is difficult to reproduce. You can build the linked package with Cython if you want, and then import src.buffersort as b to get the same sort functions I am using.
I've tried reading through the source code for bytearray in Objects/bytearrayobject.c, but I see some references to long and a few calls to PyInt_FromLong ...
This makes me suspect that the underlying C-level data of a bytearray is represented as a signed integer in C, but the conversion to Python int from raw bytes means it is unsigned between 0 and 255 in Python. I can only assume this is true ... though I don't see why Python should interpret the C long as unsigned, unless that is merely a convention for bytearray that I didn't see in the code. But if so, why wouldn't an unsigned integer be used on the C side as well, if the bytes are always treated by Python as unsigned?
If true, what should be considered the "right" result of the in-place sort? Since they are "just bytes" either interpretation is valid, I guess, but in Python spirit I think their should be one way which is considered the standard.
To match output of sorted, will it be sufficient on the C side to cast values to unsigned long when dealing with bytearray?
Does Python bytearray use signed integers in the C representation?
It uses chars. Whether those are signed depends on the compiler. You can see this in Include/bytearrayobject.h. Here's the 2.7 version:
/* Object layout */
typedef struct {
PyObject_VAR_HEAD
/* XXX(nnorwitz): should ob_exports be Py_ssize_t? */
int ob_exports; /* how many buffer exports */
Py_ssize_t ob_alloc; /* How many bytes allocated */
char *ob_bytes;
} PyByteArrayObject;
and here's the 3.5 version:
typedef struct {
PyObject_VAR_HEAD
Py_ssize_t ob_alloc; /* How many bytes allocated in ob_bytes */
char *ob_bytes; /* Physical backing buffer */
char *ob_start; /* Logical start inside ob_bytes */
/* XXX(nnorwitz): should ob_exports be Py_ssize_t? */
int ob_exports; /* How many buffer exports */
} PyByteArrayObject;
If true, what should be considered the "right" result of the in-place sort?
A Python bytearray represents a sequence of integers in the range 0 <= elem < 256, regardless of whether the compiler considers chars to be signed. You should probably sort it as a sequence of integers in the range 0 <= elem < 256, rather than as a sequence of signed chars.
To match output of sorted, will it be sufficient on the C side to cast values to unsigned long when dealing with bytearray?
I don't know enough about Cython to say what the correct code change would be.
so I've got binary literals but I need to remove the leading '0b's in each one. How do I go about subscripting them out? Here is my current code:
en = [132, 201, 141, 74, 140, 94, 141, 140, 141, 15, 31, 164, 90, 229, 201, 141, 78, 114, 241, 217, 141, 217, 140, 180, 141, 164, 51, 141, 188, 221, 31, 164, 241, 177, 141, 140, 51, 217, 141, 201, 229, 152, 141, 78, 241, 114, 78, 102, 94, 141, 74, 152, 31, 152, 141, 94, 201, 31, 164, 102, 164, 51, 90, 141, 201, 229, 164, 31, 201, 152, 152, 51, 115]
key = 84
#STEP 1 - 1ST XOR WITH KEY
for i in range(0, len(en)):
en[i] = en[i] ^ key
en[i] = bin(en[i])
if len(en[i]) < 10:
en[i] = '{:#010b}'.format(int(en[i],2))
print(en)
print(' ')
#STEP 2 - USE SBOX SUB ON EACH BLOCK NIBBLE
for i in range(0, len(en)):
en[i] = list(en[i])
print(en)
Simply remove the # character from the format specifier, because "for integers, when binary, octal, or hexadecimal output is used, this option adds the prefix respective '0b', '0o', or '0x' to the output value" (source). Example:
In [3]: '{:08b}'.format(1)
Out[3]: '00000001'
By the way, it's not necessary to perform that many conversions. You can shorten the first loop:
for i in range(len(en)):
en[i] = '{:08b}'.format(en[i] ^ key)
I have a problem with this algorithm:
function crc16 = crc16eval(D)
% CRC16EVAL CRC-CCITT check with the polynomial: x^16+x^12+x^5+1
D = uint16(D);
crchi = 255;
crclo = 255;
t = '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';
crc16htab = hex2dec(reshape(t,2,length(t)/2)');
t = '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';
crc16ltab = hex2dec(reshape(t,2,length(t)/2)');
for k = 1:length(D)
ix = double(bitxor(crchi,D(k)))+1;
crchi = bitxor(crclo,crc16htab(ix));
crclo = crc16ltab(ix);
end
crc16 = crchi*256+crclo;
end
I need translate that code to Python, and I have done the next:
def crc16eval(D):
crchi = 255
crclo = 255
t = '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'
# crc16htab = hex2dec(reshape(t,2,length(t)/2)');
tarray = [int(n, 16) for n in t] # Recorro el string t, y por cada caracter creo un nuevo entero en el array
crc16htab = reshape(tarray, (2, (len(t)/2) )).transpose()
#print crc16htab
t = '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'
# crc16ltab = hex2dec(reshape(t,2,length(t)/2)');
tarray = [int(n, 16) for n in t] # Recorro el string t, y por cada caracter creo un nuevo entero en el array
crc16ltab = reshape(tarray, (2, (len(t)/2))).transpose()
#print crc16ltab
for k in range(len(D)):
ix = crchi ^ D[k]
crchi = crclo ^ crc16htab[ix]
crclo = crc16ltab[ix]
return crchi*256+crclo
My problem is the next:
When I execute de Python code, It's take a loooong time to calculate de xor, I think the the problem is that
crclo = crc16ltab[ix]
is a matrix and that's take a long time to calculate. Which is the problem?
The pseudo-code of this algorithm is the next:
The algorithm for the CRC-CCITT is below described. Note that all operations are on bytes.
A = new byte
B = temp byte
CRCHI = High byte (most significant) of the 16-bit CRC
CRCLO = Low byte (least significant) of the 16-bit CRC
START:
FOR A = FIRST_BYTE TO LAST_BYTE IN BLOCK DO:
A = A XOR CRCHI
CRCHI = A
SHIFT A RIGHT FOUR TIMES (ZERO FILL)
A = A XOR CRCHI {IJKLMNOP}
CRCHI = CRCLO { swap CRCHI, CRCLO }
CRCLO = A
ROTATE A LEFT 4 TIMES {MNOPIJKL}
B=A { temp save }
ROTATE A LEFT ONCE {NOPIJKLM}
A = A AND $1F {000IJLLM}
CRCHI = A XOR CRCHI
A = B AND $F0 {MNOP0000}
CRCHI = A XOR CRCHI { CRCHI complete }
ROTATE B LEFT ONCE {NOP0000M}
B = B AND $ E0 {NOP00000}
CRCLO = B XOR CRCLO { CRCLO complete }
DOEND;
FINISH.
My question is: Why my python code take long time to execute? What is wrong? The problem I think is in
for k in range(len(D)):
ix = crchi ^ D[k]
crchi = crclo ^ crc16htab[ix]
crclo = crc16ltab[ix]
Thanks a lot!
I recommend a read of Ross Williams, A painless guide to CRC algorigthms which will teach you everything you ever wanted to know about CRC's and how to calculate them quickly.
Here is a conversion of the CCITT CRC algorithm used in the linux kernel. It may or may not be the same as what you are calculating as (if you read the above) you'll realise that there are quite a lot of knobs to twiddle when calculating CRCs.
# This mysterious table is just the CRC of each possible byte. It can be
# computed using the standard bit-at-a-time methods. The polynomial can
# be seen in entry 128, 0x8408. This corresponds to x^0 + x^5 + x^12.
# Add the implicit x^16, and you have the standard CRC-CCITT.
# From linux kernel lib/crc-ccitt.c
_crc_table = (
0x0000, 0x1189, 0x2312, 0x329b, 0x4624, 0x57ad, 0x6536, 0x74bf,
0x8c48, 0x9dc1, 0xaf5a, 0xbed3, 0xca6c, 0xdbe5, 0xe97e, 0xf8f7,
0x1081, 0x0108, 0x3393, 0x221a, 0x56a5, 0x472c, 0x75b7, 0x643e,
0x9cc9, 0x8d40, 0xbfdb, 0xae52, 0xdaed, 0xcb64, 0xf9ff, 0xe876,
0x2102, 0x308b, 0x0210, 0x1399, 0x6726, 0x76af, 0x4434, 0x55bd,
0xad4a, 0xbcc3, 0x8e58, 0x9fd1, 0xeb6e, 0xfae7, 0xc87c, 0xd9f5,
0x3183, 0x200a, 0x1291, 0x0318, 0x77a7, 0x662e, 0x54b5, 0x453c,
0xbdcb, 0xac42, 0x9ed9, 0x8f50, 0xfbef, 0xea66, 0xd8fd, 0xc974,
0x4204, 0x538d, 0x6116, 0x709f, 0x0420, 0x15a9, 0x2732, 0x36bb,
0xce4c, 0xdfc5, 0xed5e, 0xfcd7, 0x8868, 0x99e1, 0xab7a, 0xbaf3,
0x5285, 0x430c, 0x7197, 0x601e, 0x14a1, 0x0528, 0x37b3, 0x263a,
0xdecd, 0xcf44, 0xfddf, 0xec56, 0x98e9, 0x8960, 0xbbfb, 0xaa72,
0x6306, 0x728f, 0x4014, 0x519d, 0x2522, 0x34ab, 0x0630, 0x17b9,
0xef4e, 0xfec7, 0xcc5c, 0xddd5, 0xa96a, 0xb8e3, 0x8a78, 0x9bf1,
0x7387, 0x620e, 0x5095, 0x411c, 0x35a3, 0x242a, 0x16b1, 0x0738,
0xffcf, 0xee46, 0xdcdd, 0xcd54, 0xb9eb, 0xa862, 0x9af9, 0x8b70,
0x8408, 0x9581, 0xa71a, 0xb693, 0xc22c, 0xd3a5, 0xe13e, 0xf0b7,
0x0840, 0x19c9, 0x2b52, 0x3adb, 0x4e64, 0x5fed, 0x6d76, 0x7cff,
0x9489, 0x8500, 0xb79b, 0xa612, 0xd2ad, 0xc324, 0xf1bf, 0xe036,
0x18c1, 0x0948, 0x3bd3, 0x2a5a, 0x5ee5, 0x4f6c, 0x7df7, 0x6c7e,
0xa50a, 0xb483, 0x8618, 0x9791, 0xe32e, 0xf2a7, 0xc03c, 0xd1b5,
0x2942, 0x38cb, 0x0a50, 0x1bd9, 0x6f66, 0x7eef, 0x4c74, 0x5dfd,
0xb58b, 0xa402, 0x9699, 0x8710, 0xf3af, 0xe226, 0xd0bd, 0xc134,
0x39c3, 0x284a, 0x1ad1, 0x0b58, 0x7fe7, 0x6e6e, 0x5cf5, 0x4d7c,
0xc60c, 0xd785, 0xe51e, 0xf497, 0x8028, 0x91a1, 0xa33a, 0xb2b3,
0x4a44, 0x5bcd, 0x6956, 0x78df, 0x0c60, 0x1de9, 0x2f72, 0x3efb,
0xd68d, 0xc704, 0xf59f, 0xe416, 0x90a9, 0x8120, 0xb3bb, 0xa232,
0x5ac5, 0x4b4c, 0x79d7, 0x685e, 0x1ce1, 0x0d68, 0x3ff3, 0x2e7a,
0xe70e, 0xf687, 0xc41c, 0xd595, 0xa12a, 0xb0a3, 0x8238, 0x93b1,
0x6b46, 0x7acf, 0x4854, 0x59dd, 0x2d62, 0x3ceb, 0x0e70, 0x1ff9,
0xf78f, 0xe606, 0xd49d, 0xc514, 0xb1ab, 0xa022, 0x92b9, 0x8330,
0x7bc7, 0x6a4e, 0x58d5, 0x495c, 0x3de3, 0x2c6a, 0x1ef1, 0x0f78
)
def update_crc(data, crc, table=_crc_table):
"""
Add a byte to the crc calculation
"""
return (crc >> 8) ^ table[(crc ^ data) & 0xff]
def calculate_crc(data, crc=0xFFFF, table=_crc_table):
"""
Calculates the CRC for the data string passed in
"""
for c in data:
crc = update_crc(ord(c), crc, table)
return crc
print "%04X" % calculate_crc("Hello")
If you need to calculate CRC16 only (just result, not code), you could use PyCRC or CRC-16.
This was the final solution, too late to post here maybe... But I think that maybe It's useful for someone.
# CRC16EVAL CRC-CCITT check with the polynomial: x^16+x^12+x^5+1
def crc16eval(D):
crchi = 255
crclo = 255
crc16htab = [0, 16, 32, 48, 64, 80, 96, 112, 129, 145, 161, 177, 193, 209, 225, 241, 18, 2, 50, 34, 82, 66, 114, 98, 147, 131, 179, 163, 211, 195, 243, 227, 36, 52, 4, 20, 100, 116, 68, 84, 165, 181, 133, 149, 229, 245, 197, 213, 54, 38, 22, 6, 118, 102, 86, 70, 183, 167, 151, 135, 247, 231, 215, 199, 72, 88, 104, 120, 8, 24, 40, 56, 201, 217, 233, 249, 137, 153, 169, 185, 90, 74, 122, 106, 26, 10, 58, 42, 219, 203, 251, 235, 155, 139, 187, 171, 108, 124, 76, 92, 44, 60, 12, 28, 237, 253, 205, 221, 173, 189, 141, 157, 126, 110, 94, 78, 62, 46, 30, 14, 255, 239, 223, 207, 191, 175, 159, 143, 145, 129, 177, 161, 209, 193, 241, 225, 16, 0, 48, 32, 80, 64, 112, 96, 131, 147, 163, 179, 195, 211, 227, 243, 2, 18, 34, 50, 66, 82, 98, 114, 181, 165, 149, 133, 245, 229, 213, 197, 52, 36, 20, 4, 116, 100, 84, 68, 167, 183, 135, 151, 231, 247, 199, 215, 38, 54, 6, 22, 102, 118, 70, 86, 217, 201, 249, 233, 153, 137, 185, 169, 88, 72, 120, 104, 24, 8, 56, 40, 203, 219, 235, 251, 139, 155, 171, 187, 74, 90, 106, 122, 10, 26, 42, 58, 253, 237, 221, 205, 189, 173, 157, 141, 124, 108, 92, 76, 60, 44, 28, 12, 239, 255, 207, 223, 175, 191, 143, 159, 110, 126, 78, 94, 46, 62, 14, 30]
crc16ltab = [0, 33, 66, 99, 132, 165, 198, 231, 8, 41, 74, 107, 140, 173, 206, 239, 49, 16, 115, 82, 181, 148, 247, 214, 57, 24, 123, 90, 189, 156, 255, 222, 98, 67, 32, 1, 230, 199, 164, 133, 106, 75, 40, 9, 238, 207, 172, 141, 83, 114, 17, 48, 215, 246, 149, 180, 91, 122, 25, 56, 223, 254, 157, 188, 196, 229, 134, 167, 64, 97, 2, 35, 204, 237, 142, 175, 72, 105, 10, 43, 245, 212, 183, 150, 113, 80, 51, 18, 253, 220, 191, 158, 121, 88, 59, 26, 166, 135, 228, 197, 34, 3, 96, 65, 174, 143, 236, 205, 42, 11, 104, 73, 151, 182, 213, 244, 19, 50, 81, 112, 159, 190, 221, 252, 27, 58, 89, 120, 136, 169, 202, 235, 12, 45, 78, 111, 128, 161, 194, 227, 4, 37, 70, 103, 185, 152, 251, 218, 61, 28, 127, 94, 177, 144, 243, 210, 53, 20, 119, 86, 234, 203, 168, 137, 110, 79, 44, 13, 226, 195, 160, 129, 102, 71, 36, 5, 219, 250, 153, 184, 95, 126, 29, 60, 211, 242, 145, 176, 87, 118, 21, 52, 76, 109, 14, 47, 200, 233, 138, 171, 68, 101, 6, 39, 192, 225, 130, 163, 125, 92, 63, 30, 249, 216, 187, 154, 117, 84, 55, 22, 241, 208, 179, 146, 46, 15, 108, 77, 170, 139, 232, 201, 38, 7, 100, 69, 162, 131, 224, 193, 31, 62, 93, 124, 155, 186, 217, 248, 23, 54, 85, 116, 147, 178, 209, 240]
for k in range(len(D)):
ix = crchi ^ D[k]
crchi = crclo ^ crc16htab[ix]
crclo = crc16ltab[ix]
return crchi*256+crclo
Antonio.