| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Back during the 2017 discussion, Infra came to the conclusion that we're |
| 4 |
> going to keep SHA512 for a transition period, then remove it, and stay |
| 5 |
> with a single hash algorithm. In my opinion, we have kept it long |
| 6 |
> enough. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> WDYT? |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
As far I remember we agreed to keep two different hashes. |
| 11 |
The idea is, that if one hash is no longer safe to use, we still have a |
| 12 |
short period for migration. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
If we use only one hash, gentoo is vulnarable to "sudden problems". The |
| 15 |
everyday news show us, that broken implementations are possible and that |
| 16 |
this scenario is likely to happen over the years. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
The benefit of removing the second hash is negligible. |
| 19 |
So we should keep two different hashes. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Best, |
| 23 |
Jonas |
Archives