News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Maybe we shouldn't skip SHA-3 by espadrine on Friday June 02, 2017 @01:33PM (#14471801)
> "improvements in math might happen" is not reliable enough to calibrate forced obsolescence or regular updates

Definitely: it doesn't make much sense to move away from a hash that doesn't seem in danger of being broken, just because it is old — a clever new attack can be found for a newer hash, too (or for both).

Besides, usually there's a lapse of time between finding a major weakness and a practical collision.

On the other hand, when picking a hash… well, having a faster and less error-prone hash is nice.

Overall, I feel lucky to have such great choice.

Re:Maybe we shouldn't skip SHA-3 by andrewflnr on Friday June 02, 2017 @04:53PM (#14473217)
True. But part of the question is whether to spend the engineering effort to make sure it's even possible to move away.