Weaknesses in SHA-1

[Johan Wevers]

David Shaw wrote:

>Why would you use Tiger192 when SHA256 is available?

Not at the moment, but Tiger has a completely different design than
the SHA hashes, who are basically based on MD4/5. Thus, Tiger might
be able to withstand attacks that SHA-x is vulnerable to.

I understand that SHA-512 also has a completely different design, but that's
will still be readonly in most 1.4 setups (I assume that in 1.4 I still only
have to comment out that if(...) return statement in md.c to enable
read-write).

>I imagine SHA256 is getting a lot more attention by people trying to break
>it than Tiger192 is.

Probably. But it still has no proven weaknesses I know of.

-- 
ir. J.C.A. Wevers         //  Physics and science fiction site:
johanw at vulcan.xs4all.nl   //  http://www.xs4all.nl/~johanw/index.html
PGP/GPG public keys at http://www.xs4all.nl/~johanw/pgpkeys.html