[14855] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Additional Proposed Hash Function (Forwarded)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Shaw)
Sat Dec 6 11:44:20 2003
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 23:44:46 -0500
From: David Shaw <dshaw@jabberwocky.com>
To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Mail-Followup-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
In-Reply-To: <20031204222932.4DB007B43@berkshire.research.att.com>
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 05:29:32PM -0500, Steve Bellovin wrote:
>
> ------- Forwarded Message
>
> Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 13:40:32 -0500
> To: ebarker@nist.gov
> From: Elaine Barker <elaine.barker@nist.gov>
> Subject: Additional Proposed Hash Function
>
> NIST is proposing a change notice for FIPS 180-2, the Secure Hash Standard
> that will specify an additional hash function, SHA-224, that is based on
> SHA-256. The change notice is available at
> http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/drafts.html. NIST requests comments for
> the change notice by January 16, 2004. Comments should be addressed to
> ebarker@nist.gov.
Does anyone know what the story is behind this? It seems to be the
same sort of relationship that SHA-384 has to SHA-512 - that is, the
same basic algorithm, the same amount of work to calculate it, but
with different initial values, and some bits chopped off at the end.
It all seems a lot of effort just to save 4 bytes in the final hash.
David
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
