From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, T_DKIM_INVALID shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DF031F597 for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 16:45:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729121AbeGYR6Z (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jul 2018 13:58:25 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f65.google.com ([209.85.221.65]:33667 "EHLO mail-wr1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728637AbeGYR6Z (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jul 2018 13:58:25 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f65.google.com with SMTP id g6-v6so8072227wrp.0 for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 09:45:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=VwIkAo5N9nfRq6v/fxraWbnP4tI8fKryGpM8Pvq1k/Y=; b=WIARXAbue53D3GpcdsHNVjiDnV3xlRrSoy+rNVuDt07x+QPT0LOp3otNCbC13/DXLk SprDtKBbhGkxWqIxuRSsiA3cQQx69BWiYWB2Qpe1aIc+7IQ6qPlnmhDkeIPi1I1Pm4p1 vRPakS5ro9VhPm9gqOI1ai9hTrq5PsRACyKJulmkbXKIAI2ElztFig1Dc9B3Va461OaS duHE3jVQfwOb2D4gPuqwuee/JDCG8fUyDQuk/DedyBPyxT1VO/UA+0O+fmM9QmvNzFpi Fg+P6CowfiZPKZBbZW4gOYwJHQyaGnSdeD/HM/gp7LpCA33TVRDQe+lBKXT0ZLIrUMMQ 1m7A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=VwIkAo5N9nfRq6v/fxraWbnP4tI8fKryGpM8Pvq1k/Y=; b=PBc5Dbu1sp3N+VjPVlGQO2TOLoZfseeuNunAwnTyMtjgzxffxZDsbM46pXeL1vyyPb tajg+bWnDLrtsU6Mk4pRmpirGryc6lgjrAWFWPAaf6t123VPt44472OlD4YTIijlHXxa JsG2pqL+QBuweEaLkvTavl67QaTRrv7NWw27O0N1x06AnwStLTQHigBV+03nPiZcgrya lwoyppjXdmLz6PxeBP8Qo/oFiEN4jBXqcNcqSeoqJq60UWhG9hbmyl+g89PjOs+k8/1M uXxai84E3soplblN2GAW8ZCpkDLBOwkwT6gbuTH5HeSMHLvb9nQOrUj+VNWpth2oA1wY f4eQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlG7C09WZbP6cKkHo0V7M8BkM13I0kvpe6UOx8xifg/SvJvCh5eu +pfRRH5/ngYznkr2LcPuCPo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdTTcnnPo2PB8Nq8xABzn8m1nQYsCWXlOzvPWpNueIDnuNY4E4FKAkAKjzkPDlSb8+vhO4XCA== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:5043:: with SMTP id h3-v6mr14439438wrt.186.1532537154443; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 09:45:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (168.50.187.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.187.50.168]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e12-v6sm9228056wru.89.2018.07.25.09.45.53 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 25 Jul 2018 09:45:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Edward Thomson , "brian m . carlson" , Jonathan Nieder , Johannes Schindelin , demerphq , Adam Langley , keccak@noekeon.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] doc hash-function-transition: pick SHA-256 as NewHash References: <20180725083024.16131-1-avarab@gmail.com> <20180725083024.16131-3-avarab@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 09:45:52 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20180725083024.16131-3-avarab@gmail.com> (=?utf-8?B?IsOGdmFy?= =?utf-8?B?IEFybmZqw7Zyw7A=?= Bjarmason"'s message of "Wed, 25 Jul 2018 08:30:24 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes: > @@ -125,19 +122,19 @@ Detailed Design > --------------- > Repository format extension > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > -A NewHash repository uses repository format version `1` (see > +A SHA-256 repository uses repository format version `1` (see > Documentation/technical/repository-version.txt) with extensions > `objectFormat` and `compatObjectFormat`: > > [core] > repositoryFormatVersion = 1 > [extensions] > - objectFormat = newhash > + objectFormat = sha256 > compatObjectFormat = sha1 Whenever we said SHA1, somebody came and told us that the name of the hash is SHA-1 (with dash). Would we be nitpicker-prone in the same way with "sha256" here? > @@ -155,36 +152,36 @@ repository extensions. > Object names > ~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Objects can be named by their 40 hexadecimal digit sha1-name or 64 > -hexadecimal digit newhash-name, plus names derived from those (see > +hexadecimal digit sha256-name, plus names derived from those (see > gitrevisions(7)). Seeing this hunk makes me respond to the above question with another question: "having to write sha-256-name, sha-1-name, gpgsig-sha-256, and sha-256-content is sort of ugly, no?" I guess names with two dashes are not _too_ bad, so I dunno. > Selection of a New Hash > ----------------------- > @@ -611,6 +608,10 @@ collisions in 2^69 operations. In August they published details. > Luckily, no practical demonstrations of a collision in full SHA-1 were > published until 10 years later, in 2017. > > +It was decided that Git needed to transition to a new hash > +function. Initially no decision was made as to what function this was, > +the "NewHash" placeholder name was picked to describe it. > + > The hash function NewHash to replace SHA-1 should be stronger than > SHA-1 was: we would like it to be trustworthy and useful in practice > for at least 10 years. This sentence needs a bit of updating to match the new paragraph inserted above. "should be stronger" is something said by those who are still looking for one and/or trying to decide. Perhaps something like this? ... the "NewHash" placeholder name was used to describe it. We wanted to choose a hash function to replace SHA-1 that is stronger than SHA-1 was, and would like it to be trustworthy and useful in practice for at least 10 years. Some other relevant properties we wanted in NewHash are: > @@ -630,14 +631,19 @@ Some other relevant properties: > 4. As a tiebreaker, the hash should be fast to compute (fortunately > many contenders are faster than SHA-1). > > -Some hashes under consideration are SHA-256, SHA-512/256, SHA-256x16, > +Some hashes under consideration were SHA-256, SHA-512/256, SHA-256x16, > K12, and BLAKE2bp-256. > > +Eventually in July 2018 SHA-256 was chosen to be the NewHash. See the > +thread starting at <20180609224913.GC38834@genre.crustytoothpaste.net> > +for the discussion > +(https://public-inbox.org/git/20180609224913.GC38834@genre.crustytoothpaste.net/) > +