I have a routine that uses the PEAR module CRYPT_BLOWFISH to encrypt a
value and then base64_encode() to create a printable string. If I
reverse the process on the same host I get the orginal value however if
I do the reverse processing on a different host the result is garbage.

Shouldn't both the encryption and the encoding/decoding be host
independent? Aren't both routines standard, public algorithms that
should be reversable even between different operating systems? That's
not my case since both are linux but one is php4 and the other php5.
If that's the problem, why?

--
"There are two tragedies in life. One is to lose your heart's desire.
The other is to gain it." -- George Bernard Shaw
Rick Pasotto rick@niof.net http://www.niof.net

Rick Pasotto wrote:
> I have a routine that uses the PEAR module CRYPT_BLOWFISH to encrypt a
> value and then base64_encode() to create a printable string. If I
> reverse the process on the same host I get the orginal value however if
> I do the reverse processing on a different host the result is garbage.
>
> Shouldn't both the encryption and the encoding/decoding be host
> independent? Aren't both routines standard, public algorithms that
> should be reversable even between different operating systems? That's
> not my case since both are linux but one is php4 and the other php5.
> If that's the problem, why?

More appropriate for a pear list really, but what happens in the pear
module if a particular encryption method isn't available? Maybe host "A"
has extra MCRYPT options that host "B" doesn't.

--
Postgresql & php tutorials
http://www.designmagick.com/