News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Maybe Skip SHA-3. Parent comment

Re:Maybe Skip SHA-3 by snakeanus on Wednesday May 31, 2017 @04:07PM (#14455496)
I am quite surprised that CRC32 is slower than MD5.

> I think the specific variant of BLAKE that directly competed with Keccack is slower

BLAKE is slower than BLAKE2 indeed. BLAKE also has more rounds than BLAKE2.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Maybe Skip SHA-3 by dfox on Wednesday May 31, 2017 @07:22PM (#14456698)
CRC32 is slower because implementing it in software a way that exploits modern CPU's instruction level paralelism is non-trivial, also the obvious way how to implement CRC32 on 32bit byte oriented CPU isn't exactly cache friendly.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Maybe Skip SHA-3 by tjalfi on Wednesday May 31, 2017 @09:39PM (#14457338)
Are you referring to Intel's Slicing by 8 algorithm[0].

[0] https://static.aminer.org/pdf/PDF/000/432/446/a_systematic_a...

[ Parent | on HN ]