Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: R0b0t1 <r030t1@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest2 hashes, take n+1-th
Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2017 19:01:45
Message-Id: CAAD4mYgijpHwHXGOiGqh4bk1PDV8+Rofu=Xqr9gnv2KugfOxDQ@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest2 hashes, take n+1-th by "Hanno Böck"
1 My apologies, I forgot to address something:
2
3 On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 12:50 PM, Hanno Böck <hanno@g.o> wrote:
4 > On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 12:12:44 -0500
5 > R0b0t1 <r030t1@×××××.com> wrote:
6 >
7 >> That is precisely why I didn't suggest it be used on its own (see note
8 >> about extant use of MD5), and why I gave alternatives. If it is
9 >> desired that the hashes be computed quickly then weaker hashes will
10 >> need to be used. One usually can't have both security and speed.
11 >
12 > You can have that. Blake2 is faster than any broken legacy hash.
13 > And ripemd isn't particularly fast
14 >
15
16 Fair enough, but it is new and may have security problems related to
17 its operation that have not been found. This is hard to reason about,
18 but I would note that many cryptographic standards are fairly
19 conservative for similar reasons.
20
21 Ease of computation reduces security.
22
23 Respectfully,
24 R0b0t1