News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Lifetimes of cryptographic hash functions. Parent comment

Re:Lifetimes of cryptographic hash functions by koolba on Saturday February 25, 2017 @02:28PM (#13733294)
Using a truncated SHA-512/256 also has the advantage of being considerably faster than SHA-256 on 64-bit CPUs. The performance difference is close to 50%. As such, I see no reason to use SHA-256 for anything[1], you're better off just using SHA-512/256 as the net storage is the same as well (32-bytes).

[1]: Assuming you're running on a 64-bit platform...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Lifetimes of cryptographic hash functions by kobeya on Sunday February 26, 2017 @12:54AM (#13735903)
For hashing large data, yes. For password derivation schemes or hash trees, no. SHA512 is only faster per byte because the block size is larger. SHA256 has faster rounds.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Lifetimes of cryptographic hash functions by koolba on Sunday February 26, 2017 @07:09AM (#13736849)
If you're using SHA-anything for hashing passwords you're doing it wrong.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Lifetimes of cryptographic hash functions by kobeya on Sunday February 26, 2017 @03:47PM (#13739758)
Industry standards like PBKDF2 use hash functions like SHA internally.
[ Parent | on HN ]