pkcs11 — archive

[Dina Kurktchi-Nimeh]

On 08/06/13 16:26, Andrey Jivsov wrote: Even PKCS#11 uses trunc( SHA-1(text), 3 bytes) in a couple places. There may even be a use for SHA-512/24 -- but it's not part of the proposal either. ... yet let me observe that SHA-1/24 would be equivalent here to SHA-512/24 (clearly, a non-signature use). If one insists on all-SHA-512, it's a an edge case, but it has a neat solution: let the caller truncate the hash. Do you mean "trunc(SHA-1(x), 24 bits)" is equivalent to "SHA-512/24(x)", or is equivalent to "trunc(SHA-512(x), 24 bits)"? Which did you mean? To clarify, when I say "SHA-512/24", I mean SHA-512/t, t=24. I do not mean trunc(SHA-512(x), 24). Unless I missed something, there is no such "SHA-1/24". I wish to request that talking about straight, unadorned truncation, trunc(x, len) be used instead. Affixing the "/<whatever>" notation to mean plain truncation of other hashes will only further the initial confusion that "SHA-512/t" meant *simply* truncating to t bits, and it does NOT. D. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php