News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Maybe we shouldn't skip SHA-3. Parent comment

Re:Maybe we shouldn't skip SHA-3 by bradleyjg on Friday June 02, 2017 @11:28AM (#14470592)
If the application isn't security sensitive why not a faster non-cryptographic hash like farmhash?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Maybe we shouldn't skip SHA-3 by takeda on Friday June 02, 2017 @12:14PM (#14471007)
Maybe because it is less popular, this is first time I hear about it. Probably it's also not as widely available.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Maybe we shouldn't skip SHA-3 by StreamBright on Friday June 02, 2017 @12:20PM (#14471069)
I agree. There is also siphash that we use.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Maybe we shouldn't skip SHA-3 by dom0 on Friday June 02, 2017 @01:12PM (#14471591)
These are often not packaged, so less available. Though for some applications you wouldn't want a library anyway.

(Also, xxhash)

[ Parent | on HN ]