Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 13:10:35 -0800 From: Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> To: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libmd Makefile sha256.3 sha256.h sha256c.c shadriver.c src/sbin/md5 Makefile md5.c Message-ID: <422F664B.2080001@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20050309210113.GQ9291@darkness.comp.waw.pl> References: <200503091923.j29JN4Ti063868@repoman.freebsd.org> <422F50A6.907@criticalmagic.com> <422F55C6.3000207@freebsd.org> <422F5B36.5090400@criticalmagic.com> <422F5D94.4030702@freebsd.org> <20050309210113.GQ9291@darkness.comp.waw.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: > On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 12:33:24PM -0800, Colin Percival wrote: > +> My personal feeling is that sha(384|512) are overkill on the side of > +> hash length and probably underkill on the side of design (considering > +> that they have the same basic design which has been repeatedly shown > +> to be vulnerable to the Chinese attack) anyway -- we really need an > +> AES-like process for selecting a new hash standard. > > Colin, with all due respect. I don't think your personal feeling should be > the reason to not support sha(384|512). Of course -- I was just mentioning it as a side note. > If you think your version is cleaner/better that the one from sys/, maybe > it should be reviewed and sys/ version replaced, but we should not duplicate > crypto code. Again, I didn't know there was a version in sys/ until Richard pointed it out; if someone wants to rip my sha256c.c out and replace it with some sort of build magic which sucks in the version from sys/, I have no objection. Colin Percival
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?422F664B.2080001>