Maybe we shouldn't skip SHA-3

Re:Maybe we shouldn't skip SHA-3 by oconnor663 on Friday June 02, 2017 @11:11AM (#14470452)

BLAKE2 is faster than MD5. I think that means there's no longer any reason to use MD5 in new applications, if you have any choice.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Maybe we shouldn't skip SHA-3 by dom0 on Friday June 02, 2017 @12:43PM (#14471274)

While the portable, pure C implementation of BLAKE2 that is used almost exclusively by libraries (e.g. Python, OpenSSL) is already faster than MD5...

...there are even faster implementations of BLAKE2 around. E.g. Samuel Neves' AVX2 implementation is almost 40 % faster on Haswell. libsodium ships a different AVX2 implementation (considered experimental AFAIK by its original author, so I find that a bit strange).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Maybe we shouldn't skip SHA-3 by yuhong on Friday June 02, 2017 @03:06PM (#14472522)

For this kinds of thing, I am thinking that it might be worth it to do a "web browser" mode which uses 128-bit vectors and a "web server" mode which use 256-bit.

[ Parent | on HN ]