[48271] in Cypherpunks
Re: SHA-2
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Futplex)
Sat Jan 27 06:28:45 1996
To: cypherpunks@toad.com (Cypherpunks Mailing List)
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 1996 06:26:35 -0500 (EST)
Reply-To: cypherpunks@toad.com (Cypherpunks Mailing List)
In-Reply-To: <DLCCvL.482@news2.new-york.net> from "Mutatis Mutantdis" at Jan 17, 96 07:59:37 pm
From: futplex@pseudonym.com (Futplex)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Rob writes:
> I don't know if the revision is official or proposed. I first heard
> about it in a post to alt.security (I saved the message somewhere)
> which contained ref's in the federal register. I've seen other
> implementations that make the same fix.
>
> The difference that when the expansion function is performed, it rolls
> the dword 1 bit left before putting it in the W[] array.
Any particular reason someone called this SHA-2 ? It sounds a whole lot like
the revision of the original SHA, called SHA-1, that came out quite a while
ago. (FIPS 180-1) This is rather old hat unless they're making a _second_
revision to the standard, in which case I expect there would have been much
more noise made about it.
Futplex <futplex@pseudonym.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQEVAwUBMQoL0inaAKQPVHDZAQGzmQf9FLDvD9TmpMfgDDac0xHsJX8RspJ/tIfS
yMU6eoVSclD1hdQzMxkSc1ffPxvrLvCzILeFZVzZ/4duAp2wn1q4GPnQRvjXh98V
GXVhHusiyB4RFWOsUewXt7r4aYtPeIZI51WEnRMXanCjcVU2ChukiruLAEQqC1JS
nInfVMNjNkb1IHrltnwznnfqY91xBRzrABI1s8dRFXU/jUAI+jGr3ThfMipowvwh
egbBkrhQJjlS3J9f2XL0rte0NDO5WxL5MrdR/N54ODI9ktrhWXWrAeK/NbA4tm6I
uLrHq8FiI6HhqbrO7cEMMU2cuODv3Yu/0Z/MyD03C/uO1D0m1m1VRg==
=zI2p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
