Re: When Will We See Collisions for SHA-1? (An interesting analysis by Bruce Schneier)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 09:09:44PM +0200, Elia Pinto wrote:

> Hem , sha-3 i suppose, keccak, no ? But really is not so urgent as you
> have already told .

It depends. Read what Schneier wrote right before they announced the
SHA-3 winner:

  https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-1210.html#2

There's really no security reason not to use SHA-2, and in fact it's
probably better, as it has been more widely studied at this point. But
that part is easy; it's the compatibility switch-over that's hard (we
could also even parameterize the hash, but that has some annoyances,
too).

-Peff
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]