From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 581571396D9 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2017 13:05:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4767CE0ECD; Fri, 20 Oct 2017 13:05:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7C36E0EB5 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2017 13:05:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (c-98-218-46-55.hsd1.md.comcast.net [98.218.46.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mjo) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B9F4F33BF44 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2017 13:05:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest2 hashes, take n+1-th To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <1508440120.19870.14.camel@gentoo.org> <20171020003258.7ad4695b@pc1> From: Michael Orlitzky Message-ID: <758d9011-5605-7ead-1019-ec3474558d79@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 09:05:41 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171020003258.7ad4695b@pc1> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: c916db9e-a97d-4071-b8bb-6011fdbbdd6f X-Archives-Hash: 4ca0061e63eb8ea979ecaa09a4fd08c4 On 10/19/2017 06:32 PM, Hanno Böck wrote: > > Counterproposal: Just use SHA512. > > There isn't any evidence that any SHA2-based hash algorithm is going to > be broken any time soon. If that changes there will very likely be > decades of warning before a break becomes practical. > Every WiFi network on the planet essentially became Starbucks overnight on Sunday->Monday, so in my opinion we shouldn't bet against immediate and catastrophic failure of anything, no matter how well-tested.