Skip to main content
Cryptography

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

3
  • $\begingroup$ That said, from a practical standpoint, if I can achieve Y much faster than X with the same level of security, there's no reason not to choose the method that yields Y over X, right? Thanks for the comment, @poncho . $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 13, 2024 at 21:36
  • $\begingroup$ Well, standardization is a thing. For starters, you should describe and possibly parameterize your protocol. Other tools will probably not work, as they don't know your protocol. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 14, 2024 at 21:45
  • $\begingroup$ Note: this security analysis requires that even for short messages, the hash uses two layers. If by exception the hash of a short piece of Data (e.g. 64-byte) was SHA-256(Data), it would be easy to exhibit a collision. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 15, 2024 at 7:24