From: Gilles Van Assche <gilles.vanassche@st.com>
To: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
demerphq <demerphq@gmail.com>,
Brandon Williams <bmwill@google.com>,
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>,
Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>,
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>, David Lang <david@lang.hm>,
"brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>,
Keccak Team <keccak@noekeon.org>
Subject: Re: RFC v3: Another proposed hash function transition plan
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 18:45:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <59C149A3.6080506@st.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1.1709182340350.219280@virtualbox>
Hi Johannes,
Thanks for your feedback.
On 19/09/17 00:16, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>>> SHA-256 got much more cryptanalysis than SHA3-256 […].
>>
>> I do not think this is true.
>
> Please read what I said again: SHA-256 got much more cryptanalysis
> than SHA3-256.
Indeed. What I meant is that SHA3-256 got at least as much cryptanalysis
as SHA-256. :-)
> I never said that SHA3-256 got little cryptanalysis. Personally, I
> think that SHA3-256 got a ton more cryptanalysis than SHA-1, and that
> SHA-256 *still* got more cryptanalysis. But my opinion does not count,
> really. However, the two experts I pestered with questions over
> questions left me with that strong impression, and their opinion does
> count.
OK, I respect your opinion and that of your two experts. Yet, the "much
more" part of your statement, in particular, is something that may
require a bit more explanations.
Kind regards,
Gilles
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-19 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 113+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-04 1:12 RFC: Another proposed hash function transition plan Jonathan Nieder
2017-03-05 2:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-03-06 0:26 ` brian m. carlson
2017-03-06 18:24 ` Brandon Williams
2017-06-15 10:30 ` Which hash function to use, was " Johannes Schindelin
2017-06-15 11:05 ` Mike Hommey
2017-06-15 13:01 ` Jeff King
2017-06-15 16:30 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-06-15 19:34 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-06-15 21:59 ` Adam Langley
2017-06-15 22:41 ` brian m. carlson
2017-06-15 23:36 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-06-16 0:17 ` brian m. carlson
2017-06-16 6:25 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-06-16 13:24 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-06-16 17:38 ` Adam Langley
2017-06-16 20:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-06-16 21:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-06-16 21:24 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-06-16 21:39 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-06-16 20:42 ` Jeff King
2017-06-19 9:26 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-06-15 21:10 ` Mike Hommey
2017-06-16 4:30 ` Jeff King
2017-06-15 17:36 ` Brandon Williams
2017-06-15 19:20 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-06-15 19:13 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-03-07 0:17 ` RFC v3: " Jonathan Nieder
2017-03-09 19:14 ` Shawn Pearce
2017-03-09 20:24 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-03-10 19:38 ` Jeff King
2017-03-10 19:55 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-28 4:43 ` [PATCH v4] technical doc: add a design doc for hash function transition Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-29 6:06 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-29 8:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-29 17:34 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-10-02 8:25 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-10-02 19:41 ` Jason Cooper
2017-10-02 9:02 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-10-02 19:23 ` Jason Cooper
2017-10-03 5:40 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-10-03 13:08 ` Jason Cooper
2017-10-04 1:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-06 6:28 ` RFC v3: Another proposed hash function transition plan Junio C Hamano
2017-09-08 2:40 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-08 3:34 ` Jeff King
2017-09-11 18:59 ` Brandon Williams
2017-09-13 12:05 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-13 13:43 ` demerphq
2017-09-13 22:51 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-14 18:26 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-14 18:40 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-14 22:09 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-13 23:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-09-14 18:45 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-18 12:17 ` Gilles Van Assche
2017-09-18 22:16 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-19 16:45 ` Gilles Van Assche [this message]
2017-09-29 13:17 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-29 14:54 ` Joan Daemen
2017-09-29 22:33 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-30 22:02 ` Joan Daemen
2017-10-02 14:26 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-18 22:25 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-26 17:05 ` Jason Cooper
2017-09-26 22:11 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-26 22:25 ` [PATCH] technical doc: add a design doc for hash function transition Stefan Beller
2017-09-26 23:38 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-26 23:51 ` RFC v3: Another proposed hash function transition plan Jonathan Nieder
2017-10-02 14:54 ` Jason Cooper
2017-10-02 16:50 ` Brandon Williams
2017-10-02 14:00 ` Jason Cooper
2017-10-02 17:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-10-02 19:37 ` Jeff King
2017-09-13 16:30 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-13 21:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-13 22:07 ` Stefan Beller
2017-09-13 22:18 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-14 2:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-14 15:23 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-14 15:45 ` demerphq
2017-09-14 22:06 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-13 22:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-13 22:27 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-14 2:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-14 12:39 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-09-14 16:36 ` Brandon Williams
2017-09-14 18:49 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-15 20:42 ` Philip Oakley
2017-03-05 11:02 ` RFC: " David Lang
[not found] ` <CA+dhYEXHbQfJ6KUB1tWS9u1MLEOJL81fTYkbxu4XO-i+379LPw@mail.gmail.com>
2017-03-06 9:43 ` Jeff King
2017-03-06 23:40 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-03-07 0:03 ` Mike Hommey
2017-03-06 8:43 ` Jeff King
2017-03-06 18:39 ` Jonathan Tan
2017-03-06 19:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-03-06 19:59 ` Brandon Williams
2017-03-06 21:53 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-03-07 8:59 ` Jeff King
2017-03-06 18:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-03-07 18:57 ` Ian Jackson
2017-03-07 19:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-03-08 11:20 ` Ian Jackson
2017-03-08 15:37 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-03-08 15:40 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-03-20 5:21 ` Use base32? Jason Hennessey
2017-03-20 5:58 ` Michael Steuer
2017-03-20 8:05 ` Jacob Keller
2017-03-21 3:07 ` Michael Steuer
2017-03-13 9:24 ` RFC: Another proposed hash function transition plan The Keccak Team
2017-03-13 17:48 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-03-13 18:34 ` ankostis
2017-03-17 11:07 ` Johannes Schindelin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=59C149A3.6080506@st.com \
--to=gilles.vanassche@st.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=bmwill@google.com \
--cc=david@lang.hm \
--cc=demerphq@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=jonathantanmy@google.com \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=keccak@noekeon.org \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=sandals@crustytoothpaste.net \
--cc=sbeller@google.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.