From: Gilles Van Assche <gilles.vanassche@st.com>
To: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
demerphq <demerphq@gmail.com>,
Brandon Williams <bmwill@google.com>,
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>,
Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>,
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>, David Lang <david@lang.hm>,
"brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>,
Keccak Team <keccak@noekeon.org>
Subject: Re: RFC v3: Another proposed hash function transition plan
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 18:45:23 +0200
Message-ID: <59C149A3.6080506@st.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1.1709182340350.219280@virtualbox>
Hi Johannes,
Thanks for your feedback.
On 19/09/17 00:16, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>>> SHA-256 got much more cryptanalysis than SHA3-256 […].
>>
>> I do not think this is true.
>
> Please read what I said again: SHA-256 got much more cryptanalysis
> than SHA3-256.
Indeed. What I meant is that SHA3-256 got at least as much cryptanalysis
as SHA-256. :-)
> I never said that SHA3-256 got little cryptanalysis. Personally, I
> think that SHA3-256 got a ton more cryptanalysis than SHA-1, and that
> SHA-256 *still* got more cryptanalysis. But my opinion does not count,
> really. However, the two experts I pestered with questions over
> questions left me with that strong impression, and their opinion does
> count.
OK, I respect your opinion and that of your two experts. Yet, the "much
more" part of your statement, in particular, is something that may
require a bit more explanations.
Kind regards,
Gilles
next prev parent reply index
Thread overview: 112+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-04 1:12 RFC: " Jonathan Nieder
2017-03-05 2:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-03-06 0:26 ` brian m. carlson
2017-03-06 18:24 ` Brandon Williams
2017-06-15 10:30 ` Which hash function to use, was " Johannes Schindelin
2017-06-15 11:05 ` Mike Hommey
2017-06-15 13:01 ` Jeff King
2017-06-15 16:30 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-06-15 19:34 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-06-15 21:59 ` Adam Langley
2017-06-15 22:41 ` brian m. carlson
2017-06-15 23:36 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-06-16 0:17 ` brian m. carlson
2017-06-16 6:25 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-06-16 13:24 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-06-16 17:38 ` Adam Langley
2017-06-16 20:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-06-16 21:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-06-16 21:24 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-06-16 21:39 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-06-16 20:42 ` Jeff King
2017-06-19 9:26 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-06-15 21:10 ` Mike Hommey
2017-06-16 4:30 ` Jeff King
2017-06-15 17:36 ` Brandon Williams
2017-06-15 19:20 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-06-15 19:13 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-03-07 0:17 ` RFC v3: " Jonathan Nieder
2017-03-09 19:14 ` Shawn Pearce
2017-03-09 20:24 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-03-10 19:38 ` Jeff King
2017-03-10 19:55 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-28 4:43 ` [PATCH v4] technical doc: add a design doc for hash function transition Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-29 6:06 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-29 8:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-29 17:34 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-10-02 8:25 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-10-02 19:41 ` Jason Cooper
2017-10-02 9:02 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-10-02 19:23 ` Jason Cooper
2017-10-03 5:40 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-10-03 13:08 ` Jason Cooper
2017-10-04 1:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-06 6:28 ` RFC v3: Another proposed hash function transition plan Junio C Hamano
2017-09-08 2:40 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-08 3:34 ` Jeff King
2017-09-11 18:59 ` Brandon Williams
2017-09-13 12:05 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-13 13:43 ` demerphq
2017-09-13 22:51 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-14 18:26 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-14 18:40 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-14 22:09 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-13 23:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-09-14 18:45 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-18 12:17 ` Gilles Van Assche
2017-09-18 22:16 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-19 16:45 ` Gilles Van Assche [this message]
2017-09-29 13:17 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-29 14:54 ` Joan Daemen
2017-09-29 22:33 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-30 22:02 ` Joan Daemen
2017-10-02 14:26 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-18 22:25 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-26 17:05 ` Jason Cooper
2017-09-26 22:11 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-26 22:25 ` [PATCH] technical doc: add a design doc for hash function transition Stefan Beller
2017-09-26 23:38 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-26 23:51 ` RFC v3: Another proposed hash function transition plan Jonathan Nieder
2017-10-02 14:54 ` Jason Cooper
2017-10-02 16:50 ` Brandon Williams
2017-10-02 14:00 ` Jason Cooper
2017-10-02 17:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-10-02 19:37 ` Jeff King
2017-09-13 16:30 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-13 21:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-13 22:07 ` Stefan Beller
2017-09-13 22:18 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-14 2:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-14 15:23 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-14 15:45 ` demerphq
2017-09-14 22:06 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-13 22:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-13 22:27 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-14 2:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-14 12:39 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-14 16:36 ` Brandon Williams
2017-09-14 18:49 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-15 20:42 ` Philip Oakley
2017-03-05 11:02 ` RFC: " David Lang
[not found] ` <CA+dhYEXHbQfJ6KUB1tWS9u1MLEOJL81fTYkbxu4XO-i+379LPw@mail.gmail.com>
2017-03-06 9:43 ` Jeff King
2017-03-06 23:40 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-03-07 0:03 ` Mike Hommey
2017-03-06 8:43 ` Jeff King
2017-03-06 18:39 ` Jonathan Tan
2017-03-06 19:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-03-06 19:59 ` Brandon Williams
2017-03-06 21:53 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-03-07 8:59 ` Jeff King
2017-03-06 18:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-03-07 18:57 ` Ian Jackson
2017-03-07 19:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-03-08 11:20 ` Ian Jackson
2017-03-08 15:37 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-03-08 15:40 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-03-20 5:21 ` Use base32? Jason Hennessey
2017-03-20 5:58 ` Michael Steuer
2017-03-20 8:05 ` Jacob Keller
2017-03-21 3:07 ` Michael Steuer
2017-03-13 9:24 ` RFC: Another proposed hash function transition plan The Keccak Team
2017-03-13 17:48 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-03-13 18:34 ` ankostis
2017-03-17 11:07 ` Johannes Schindelin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publically to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=59C149A3.6080506@st.com \
--to=gilles.vanassche@st.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=bmwill@google.com \
--cc=david@lang.hm \
--cc=demerphq@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=jonathantanmy@google.com \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=keccak@noekeon.org \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=sandals@crustytoothpaste.net \
--cc=sbeller@google.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
git@vger.kernel.org mailing list mirror (one of many)
Archives are clonable:
git clone --mirror https://public-inbox.org/git
git clone --mirror http://ou63pmih66umazou.onion/git
git clone --mirror http://czquwvybam4bgbro.onion/git
git clone --mirror http://hjrcffqmbrq6wope.onion/git
Newsgroups are available over NNTP:
nntp://news.public-inbox.org/inbox.comp.version-control.git
nntp://ou63pmih66umazou.onion/inbox.comp.version-control.git
nntp://czquwvybam4bgbro.onion/inbox.comp.version-control.git
nntp://hjrcffqmbrq6wope.onion/inbox.comp.version-control.git
nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git
note: .onion URLs require Tor: https://www.torproject.org/
or Tor2web: https://www.tor2web.org/
AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox