News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The first chosen-prefix collision for SHA-1. Parent comment

Re:The first chosen-prefix collision for SHA-1 by staticassertion on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @01:40PM (#21983079)
Is SHA1 not still faster than 256/512? And Blake2 barely faster? I suspect with some hardware SHA1 is still going to beat all of those out - am I wrong? I would love to learn more.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The first chosen-prefix collision for SHA-1 by tptacek on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @04:11PM (#21984905)
https://bench.cr.yp.to/results-hash.html

Regardless, no competent designer is going to use SHA1.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The first chosen-prefix collision for SHA-1 by staticassertion on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @04:31PM (#21985115)
Thank you, that's an excellent chart.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The first chosen-prefix collision for SHA-1 by __s on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @04:55PM (#21985400)
CRC is faster than SHA1
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The first chosen-prefix collision for SHA-1 by mzs on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @06:06PM (#21986216)
It's not about the speed, it's about the 'is it secure.'
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The first chosen-prefix collision for SHA-1 by sicariusnoctis on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @07:38PM (#21986989)
If my amazing hash function takes 10^10^10 years to compute, it's possibly more secure than anything else listed there, but it's also quite useless.
[ Parent | on HN ]