News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Debunking NIST's calculation of the Kyber-512 security level. Parent comment

Re:Debunking NIST's calculation of the Kyber-512 security level by Ar-Curunir on Tuesday October 03, 2023 @08:25PM (#37759408)
That is not true. There is no such requirement for a hash function.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Debunking NIST's calculation of the Kyber-512 security level by ethbr1 on Tuesday October 03, 2023 @09:16PM (#37759744)
Thread is talking about cryptographic hash functions, given the context
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Debunking NIST's calculation of the Kyber-512 security level by Ar-Curunir on Wednesday October 04, 2023 @01:15AM (#37761080)
Yes, they don’t output random looking things necessarily. For example a hash function could be collision resistant but not pre image resistant, or vice versa. There’s much more nuance in these definitions.
[ Parent | on HN ]