4 ms·

I mean, SHA-3?

• encryptluks2 4y ago
  Blake3 is faster and more secure. I also really don't trust NIST to be honest when they have a history of promoting solutions with backdoors.
  • oconnor663 4y ago
    I'm not aware of any reason SHA-3 would be less secure than BLAKE3. Quite the opposite: SHA-3 has a very large security margin, so large that the authors cut the number of rounds in half for KangarooTwelve.