Messages in this thread | | | From | (David Wagner) | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH] Make cryptoapi non-optional? | Date | Thu, 14 Aug 2003 19:40:25 +0000 (UTC) |
| |
Val Henson wrote: >Throwing away 80 bits of the 160 bit output is much better >than folding the two halves together. In all the cases we've >discussed where folding might improve matters, throwing away half the >output would be even better.
I don't see where you are getting this from. Define F(x) = first80bits(SHA(x)) G(x) = first80bits(SHA(x)) xor last80bits(SHA(x)). What makes you think that F is a better (or worse) hash function than G?
I think there is little basis for discriminating between them. If SHA is cryptographically secure, both F and G are fine. If SHA is insecure, then all bets are off, and both F and G might be weak. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |