mirror of
https://github.com/moparisthebest/xeps
synced 2024-11-26 19:22:15 -05:00
XEP-0414: Reverse SHOULD/MUST for Blake2b algorithms
While Blake2b is capable to produce digests of any size from 1 to 64 bytes, It's default mode is 64 bytes (512 bits) though. Some libraries implement just default digest size. * OpenSSL supports blake2s-256 and blake2b-512 (no blake2b-256) * gcrypt supports both blake2b-256 and blake2b-512 * nss supports none of blake2b * Botan - any digest size * Java: https://github.com/alphazero/Blake2b - any digest size * Go-lang: https://godoc.org/golang.org/x/crypto/blake2b - both blake2b-256 and blake2b-512 * Rust: https://docs.rs/blake2/0.8.1/blake2/ - any digest size, 512 by default * JS: https://github.com/dcposch/blakejs - any digest size, 512 by default Also various libraries based on openssl will provide just blake2b-512. So it looks to be a preferable choice over blake2b-256
This commit is contained in:
parent
eb3ccc48f0
commit
943ee76cb8
10
xep-0414.xml
10
xep-0414.xml
@ -20,6 +20,12 @@
|
|||||||
<supersededby/>
|
<supersededby/>
|
||||||
<shortname>hashrecs</shortname>
|
<shortname>hashrecs</shortname>
|
||||||
&jonaswielicki;
|
&jonaswielicki;
|
||||||
|
<revision>
|
||||||
|
<version>0.4.0</version>
|
||||||
|
<date>2020-05-23</date>
|
||||||
|
<initials>rion</initials>
|
||||||
|
<remark>Make Blake2b-256 SHOULD and Blake2b 512 MUST</remark>
|
||||||
|
</revision>
|
||||||
<revision>
|
<revision>
|
||||||
<version>0.3.0</version>
|
<version>0.3.0</version>
|
||||||
<date>2019-08-19</date>
|
<date>2019-08-19</date>
|
||||||
@ -151,12 +157,12 @@
|
|||||||
<tr>
|
<tr>
|
||||||
<td>BLAKE2b256</td>
|
<td>BLAKE2b256</td>
|
||||||
<td>256 bits</td>
|
<td>256 bits</td>
|
||||||
<td>MUST</td>
|
<td>SHOULD</td>
|
||||||
</tr>
|
</tr>
|
||||||
<tr>
|
<tr>
|
||||||
<td>BLAKE2b512</td>
|
<td>BLAKE2b512</td>
|
||||||
<td>512 bits</td>
|
<td>512 bits</td>
|
||||||
<td>SHOULD</td>
|
<td>MUST</td>
|
||||||
</tr>
|
</tr>
|
||||||
</table>
|
</table>
|
||||||
<p>These recommendations ought to be reviewed yearly by the &COUNCIL;.</p>
|
<p>These recommendations ought to be reviewed yearly by the &COUNCIL;.</p>
|
||||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user