3 ms·
The NIST likes having two standardized "good" hash functions. I doubt we will have a SHA-4 until SHA-2 starts getting close to a break. The SHA-3 competition
by pclmulqdq 4y ago
The NIST likes having two standardized "good" hash functions. I doubt we will have a SHA-4 until SHA-2 starts getting close to a break. The SHA-3 competition started once SHA-1 started showing some possible weaknesses. Also, if SHA-2 ends up getting retired, Blake3 will likely become SHA-4: Blake2 lost to Keccak because Blake2 was too similar to SHA-2.
- twiss 4y agoNIST seems perfectly comfortable with having only one cryptographic primitive for a given category as long as there's high confidence in it. The reason we have two hash algorithms is that back when the SHA-3 competition was created, there was some uncertainty about the long-term security of SHA-2. That uncertainty has since subsided, I would say. But if SHA-2 does end up being considered insecure, as long as there's no reason to suspect that the same will happen to SHA-3, there's no reason to create a SHA-4 yet.