On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 8:05 AM, lists wrote:
> On 05/15/2015 12:09 AM, Jay Foster wrote:
>>
>> What is the down side of truncating a hash? For example, an SHA-256 hash
>> is 256 bits. Is it any less secure if one was to drop the last 128 bits to
>> make a 128 bit hash or take the MD5 hash of th
On 15-05-2015 00:09, Jay Foster wrote:
What is the down side of truncating a hash? For example, an SHA-256
hash is 256 bits. Is it any less secure if one was to drop the last
128 bits to make a 128 bit hash or take the MD5 hash of the SHA-256
hash to get a 128 bit hash? It does not seem that
On 05/15/2015 12:09 AM, Jay Foster wrote:
What is the down side of truncating a hash? For example, an SHA-256
hash is 256 bits. Is it any less secure if one was to drop the last
128 bits to make a 128 bit hash or take the MD5 hash of the SHA-256
hash to get a 128 bit hash? It does not seem t
> From: openssl-users [mailto:openssl-users-boun...@openssl.org] On Behalf
> Of Jay Foster
> Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 18:09
> To: openssl-users@openssl.org
> Subject: [openssl-users] Truncating A Hash
>
> What is the down side of truncating a hash? For example, an SHA-2
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 03:09:10PM -0700, Jay Foster wrote:
> What is the down side of truncating a hash? For example, an SHA-256 hash is
> 256 bits. Is it any less secure if one was to drop the last 128 bits to
> make a 128 bit hash
Yes, a truncated hash is less secure against both collision a
What is the down side of truncating a hash? For example, an SHA-256
hash is 256 bits. Is it any less secure if one was to drop the last 128
bits to make a 128 bit hash or take the MD5 hash of the SHA-256 hash to
get a 128 bit hash? It does not seem that such an action would make it
any easie
