Re: Hash algorithm analysis

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

 



On Fri, Jul 20 2018, brian m. carlson wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 12:29:42PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> My understanding of the discussion so far:
>>
>> Keccak team encourages us[1] to consider a variant like K12 instead of
>> SHA3.
>>
>> AGL explains[2] that the algorithms considered all seem like
>> reasonable choices and we should decide using factors like
>> implementation ease and performance.
>>
>> If we choose a Keccak-based function, AGL also[3] encourages using a
>> variant like K12 instead of SHA3.
>>
>> Dscho strongly prefers[4] SHA-256, because of
>> - wide implementation availability, including in future hardware
>> - has been widely analyzed
>> - is fast
>>
>> Yves Orton and Linus Torvalds prefer[5] SHA3 over SHA2 because of how
>> it is constructed.
>
> I know this discussion has sort of petered out, but I'd like to see if
> we can revive it.  I'm writing index v3 and having a decision would help
> me write tests for it.
>
> To summarize the discussion that's been had in addition to the above,
> Ævar has also stated a preference for SHA-256 and I would prefer BLAKE2b
> over SHA-256 over SHA3-256, although any of them would be fine.
>
> Are there other contributors who have a strong opinion?  Are there
> things I can do to help us coalesce around an option?

I have a vague recollection of suggesting something similar in the past,
but can't find that E-Mail (and maybe it never happened), but for
testing purposes isn't in simplest if we just have some "test SHA-1"
algorithm where we pretent that all inputs like "STRING" are really
"PREFIX-STRING" for the purposes of hashing, or fake shortening /
lengthening the hash to test arbitrary lenghts of N (just by repeating
the hash from the beginning is probably good enough...).

That would make such patches easier to review, since we wouldn't need to
carry hundreds/thousands of lines of dense hashing code, but a more
trivial wrapper around SHA-1, and we could have some test mode where we
could compile & run tests with an arbitrary hash length to make sure
everything's future proof even after we move to NewHash.



[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]

  Powered by Linux