Arno Wagner <arno@...> writes: > SHA1 is a "best possible" for this case. Seriously. Okay. I always strive to understand, and i'm interested in the respective backgrounds. > Not to "break" it. To reverse it in one instance. > To break it, you have to compute that table. Okay probably not so simple. > > Okay respect brute-force attacks is a key space of 16^128 in fact > > impossible, but why not exploit the maximum of what is possible? :) > > Simplicity, use of well-knonw components, prevention of > over-engineering. All well known and valuable engineering > practices. Also note that in order to change the hash, > code has to be changed and that comes with the risk of > introducing bugs. "If it aint broke, don't fix it" is > another very important engineering principle. > > Listen, I can understand your view. Every budding crypto-nerd > goes through it, and I certainly have. But it is something > you eventually grow out of when you understand the larger > picture. > > Regards, > Arno > No problem, i understand what you wanted to tell me, and can understand that you should definitely consider again the overall picture. Thanks. _______________________________________________ dm-crypt mailing list dm-crypt@xxxxxxxx http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt
