* Jeff Garzik: > * likely more CPU cycles per hash, though I haven't measured. According to a quick test using "openssl speed", it's a factor of two to four, depending on the input size (the difference is less pronounced for small input sizes). > Maybe sha-256 could be considered for the next major-rev of git? And in 2008, you'd have to rewrite history again, to use the next "stronger" hash function? Do you think that's really necessary or desirable? Most users will have good control over what data enters their repositories, so they can spot the evil twins thanks to their high-entropy contents. Obviously, a second preimage attack would mattr, but even for MD5, we aren't close to that one AFAIK. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html