Re: [RFC PATCH 09/12] Add a base implementation of SHA-256 support
- From
Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com>
- Date
- Aug 29, 2018, 12:54 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7b1aac2e-b768-cfec-2dfe-61f63066ae1a@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20180829005857.980820-10-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
On 8/28/2018 8:58 PM, brian m. carlson wrote:
> SHA-256 is somewhat slower to compute than SHA-1 in software. However, > since our default SHA-1 implementation is collision-detecting, a > reasonable cryptographic library implementation of SHA-256 will actually > be faster than SHA-256.
Nit: do you mean "faster than SHA-1DC"?