On 13 March 2017 at 18:48, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > The Keccak Team wrote: > > > We have read your transition plan to move away from SHA-1 and noticed > > your intent to use SHA3-256 as the new hash function in the new Git > > repository format and protocol. Although this is a valid choice, we > > think that the new SHA-3 standard proposes alternatives that may also be > > interesting for your use cases. As designers of the Keccak function > > family, we thought we could jump in the mail thread and present these > > alternatives. > > I indeed had some reservations about SHA3-256's performance. The main > hash function we had in mind to compare against is blake2bp-256. This > overview of other functions to compare against should end up being > very helpful. What if some of us need this extra difficulty, and don't mind about the performance tax, because we need to refer to hashes 10 or 30 years from now, or even in the Post Quantum era? Thanks, Kostis