3 ms·
I couldn’t see in the article, but why settle on SHA2-256? Why not something bigger or newer such as SHA2-512 or SHA3-256? Or why not a variable length hash lik
by austincheney 6y ago
I couldn’t see in the article, but why settle on SHA2-256? Why not something bigger or newer such as SHA2-512 or SHA3-256? Or why not a variable length hash like SHAKE256?
- chmaynard 6y agoI believe this is discussed in https://lwn.net/Articles/811068/ https://lwn.net/Articles/811068/