On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 6:43 AM, demerphq <demerphq@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> SHA3 however uses a completely different design where it mixes a 1088
> bit block into a 1600 bit state, for a leverage of 2:3, and the excess
> is *preserved between each block*.
Yes. And considering that the SHA1 attack was actually predicated on
the fact that each block was independent (no extra state between), I
do think SHA3 is a better model.
So I'd rather see SHA3-256 than SHA256.
Linus
