| 1 |
Hi |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I'd like to propose the following for portage: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> - Only support one "secure" hash function (such as sha2, sha3, blake2, etc) |
| 6 |
> - Only generate and parse one hash function in Manifest files |
| 7 |
> - Remove support for multiple hash functions |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
No, this has no benefit. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> In other words, what are we actually getting by having _both_ SHA2-512 |
| 12 |
> and BLAKE2b for every file in every Manifest? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Implementations are often broken and we have to expect zero day attacks |
| 15 |
on hashes and on signatures. Hence it does not hurt to have a second hash. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
It is very likely that we can not trust in X for a while in the next |
| 18 |
years, but it is very unlikely that two different implementations are |
| 19 |
affected. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Additionally calculating a second hash does not cost anything. |
| 22 |
This was also the outcome of the discussion some time ago here. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Best, |
| 26 |
Jonas |
Archives