Re: safety of blindly truncating hashes (Re: TEA)

Ben Laurie (ben@algroup.co.uk)
Thu, 02 Jul 1998 10:12:10 +0100

• Next message: Hamdi Tounsi: "Re: blowfish's key len: using 576-bit keysu"
• Previous message: Mok-Kong Shen: "WEAK1 -- A Poor Man's Data Encryption Algorithm"
• Next in thread: Adam Back: "Re: safety of blindly truncating hashes (Re: TEA)"
• Reply: Adam Back: "Re: safety of blindly truncating hashes (Re: TEA)"

Adam Back wrote:
> I think discarding from the right is as good as mixing the bits back
> in with xor for SHA1. The right is where people would I think
> normally remove bits from anyway, because it is easier to code.

Eh? OK, memcpy(x,y,n) is marginally easier than memcpy(x,y+m,n) but not
enough of a difference that anyone is going to seriously make a choice
on that basis, surely?

Cheers,

Ben.

-- 
Ben Laurie            |Phone: +44 (181) 735 0686| Apache Group member
Freelance Consultant  |Fax:   +44 (181) 735 0689|http://www.apache.org/
and Technical Director|Email: ben@algroup.co.uk |
A.L. Digital Ltd,     |Apache-SSL author     http://www.apache-ssl.org/
London, England.      |"Apache: TDG" http://www.ora.com/catalog/apache/
WE'RE RECRUITING! http://www.aldigital.co.uk/recruit/

• Next message: Hamdi Tounsi: "Re: blowfish's key len: using 576-bit keysu"
• Previous message: Mok-Kong Shen: "WEAK1 -- A Poor Man's Data Encryption Algorithm"
• Next in thread: Adam Back: "Re: safety of blindly truncating hashes (Re: TEA)"
• Reply: Adam Back: "Re: safety of blindly truncating hashes (Re: TEA)"