Re: Hash algorithm analysis

From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Jul 21, 2018, 00:31 UTC
Message-ID: <20180721003102.GB83654@aiede.svl.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20180720215220.GB18502@genre.crustytoothpaste.net>

Hi,

brian m. carlson wrote:

> I know this discussion has sort of petered out, but I'd like to see if
> we can revive it.  I'm writing index v3 and having a decision would help
> me write tests for it.

Nice!  That's awesome.

Show 6 quoted lines

> To summarize the discussion that's been had in addition to the above,
> Ævar has also stated a preference for SHA-256 and I would prefer BLAKE2b
> over SHA-256 over SHA3-256, although any of them would be fine.
>
> Are there other contributors who have a strong opinion?  Are there
> things I can do to help us coalesce around an option?

My advice would be to go with BLAKE2b. If anyone objects, we can deal with their objection at that point (and I volunteer to help with cleaning up any mess in rewriting test cases that this advice causes).

Full disclosure: my preference order (speaking for myself and no one else) is

 K12 > BLAKE2bp-256 > SHA-256x16 > BLAKE2b > SHA-256 > SHA-512/256 > SHA3-256

so I'm not just asking you to go with my favorite. ;-)

Jonathan