Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I was wondering how the new "optional parallel mode" affects the long history of professional scrutiny. Is adding an optional parallel mode something that a professional cryptographer can do without significantly changing the security model?[^1] Are there certain families of hash designs amenable slight tweaks that sacrifice a little security for a relatively large speed improvement or is this something that could happen with the majority of hash schemes?

As always, thanks for playing "HN asks tptacek about security."

[^1]: This is a genuine question. I do not have any reason to doubt zooko et al's judgement. I guess another way of saying this is "For someone smarter than me is it easy to know when this is a good/bad idea?"

Strange segway: I was browsing Plos and saw this article about egg washing and shell characteristics. After reading the title for some reason I remembered reading a somewhat lengthy comment you wrote about the safety of eggs and different egg washing regimes in the us and the uk. I did not check too see if my recollection was accurate but in case it is and the comment was indicative of your interest in the subject you might get a kick out of:

Effect of Egg Washing and Correlation between Eggshell Characteristics and Egg Penetration by Various Salmonella Typhimurium Strains. PLoS ONE 9(3): e90987. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0090987

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjourna...



If you do the padding and signaling of last nodes correctly, which as far as we know BLAKE2 does, a break in the parallel mode translates to a break in the sequential hash function. This was proven by the Keccak people a while ago [1].

[1] http://eprint.iacr.org/2009/210




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: