From: demerphq <demerphq@gmail.com>
To: Sitaram Chamarty <sitaramc@gmail.com>
Cc: "brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>,
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>,
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>, Git <git@vger.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
agl@google.com, keccak@noekeon.org
Subject: Re: Hash algorithm analysis
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 14:55:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANgJU+U+XEpBLQAZKkNTqcAKTfKqMStNBk2pr7wjLq2q+BELww@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <98111891-a605-1cfd-e92b-a3b5b4186ac2@gmail.com>
On Mon, 23 Jul 2018 at 14:48, Sitaram Chamarty <sitaramc@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 07/23/2018 06:10 PM, demerphq wrote:
> > On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 at 01:59, brian m. carlson
> > <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> wrote:
> >> I will admit that I don't love making this decision by myself, because
> >> right now, whatever I pick, somebody is going to be unhappy. I want to
> >> state, unambiguously, that I'm trying to make a decision that is in the
> >> interests of the Git Project, the community, and our users.
> >>
> >> I'm happy to wait a few more days to see if a consensus develops; if so,
> >> I'll follow it. If we haven't come to one by, say, Wednesday, I'll make
> >> a decision and write my patches accordingly. The community is free, as
> >> always, to reject my patches if taking them is not in the interest of
> >> the project.
> >
> > Hi Brian.
> >
> > I do not envy you this decision.
> >
> > Personally I would aim towards pushing this decision out to the git
> > user base and facilitating things so we can choose whatever hash
> > function (and config) we wish, including ones not invented yet.
> >
> > Failing that I would aim towards a hashing strategy which has the most
> > flexibility. Keccak for instance has the interesting property that its
> > security level is tunable, and that it can produce aribitrarily long
> > hashes. Leaving aside other concerns raised elsewhere in this thread,
> > these two features alone seem to make it a superior choice for an
> > initial implementation. You can find bugs by selecting unusual hash
> > sizes, including very long ones, and you can provide ways to tune the
> > function to peoples security and speed preferences. Someone really
> > paranoid can specify an unusually large round count and a very long
> > hash.
> >
> > Also frankly I keep thinking that the ability to arbitrarily extend
> > the hash size has to be useful /somewhere/ in git.
>
> I would not suggest arbitrarily long hashes. Not only would it
> complicate a lot of code, it is not clear that it has any real benefit.
It has the benefit of armoring the code for the *next* hash change,
and making it clear that such decisions are arbitrary and should not
be depended on.
> Plus, the code contortions required to support arbitrarily long hashes
> would be more susceptible to potential bugs and exploits, simply by
> being more complex code. Why take chances?
I think the benefits would outweight the risks.
> I would suggest (a) hash size of 256 bits and (b) choice of any hash
> function that can produce such a hash. If people feel strongly that 256
> bits may also turn out to be too small (really?) then a choice of 256 or
> 512, but not arbitrary sizes.
I am aware of too many systems that cannot change their size and are
locked into woefully bad decisions that were made long ago to buy
this.
Making it a per-repo option, would eliminate assumptions and make for
a more secure and flexible tool.
Anyway, I am not going to do the work so my opinion is worth the price
of the paper I sent it on. :-)
cheers,
Yves
--
perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-23 12:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-09 20:56 State of NewHash work, future directions, and discussion brian m. carlson
2018-06-09 21:26 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-06-09 22:49 ` Hash algorithm analysis brian m. carlson
2018-06-11 19:29 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-06-11 20:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-11 23:27 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-06-12 0:11 ` David Lang
2018-06-12 0:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-11 22:35 ` brian m. carlson
2018-06-12 16:21 ` Gilles Van Assche
2018-06-13 23:58 ` brian m. carlson
2018-06-15 10:33 ` Gilles Van Assche
2018-07-20 21:52 ` brian m. carlson
2018-07-21 0:31 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-07-21 19:52 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-07-21 20:25 ` brian m. carlson
2018-07-21 22:38 ` Johannes Schindelin
2018-07-21 23:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-21 23:59 ` brian m. carlson
2018-07-22 9:34 ` Eric Deplagne
2018-07-22 14:21 ` brian m. carlson
2018-07-22 14:55 ` Eric Deplagne
2018-07-26 10:05 ` Johannes Schindelin
2018-07-22 15:23 ` Joan Daemen
2018-07-22 18:54 ` Adam Langley
2018-07-26 10:31 ` Johannes Schindelin
2018-07-23 12:40 ` demerphq
2018-07-23 12:48 ` Sitaram Chamarty
2018-07-23 12:55 ` demerphq [this message]
2018-07-23 18:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-23 17:57 ` Stefan Beller
2018-07-23 18:35 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-07-24 19:01 ` Edward Thomson
2018-07-24 20:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-24 20:49 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-07-24 21:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2018-07-24 22:10 ` brian m. carlson
2018-07-30 9:06 ` Johannes Schindelin
2018-07-30 20:01 ` Dan Shumow
2018-08-03 2:57 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-09-18 15:18 ` Joan Daemen
2018-09-18 15:32 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-09-18 16:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-25 8:30 ` [PATCH 0/2] document that NewHash is now SHA-256 Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-07-25 8:30 ` [PATCH 1/2] doc hash-function-transition: note the lack of a changelog Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-07-25 8:30 ` [PATCH 2/2] doc hash-function-transition: pick SHA-256 as NewHash Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-07-25 16:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2018-07-25 17:25 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-07-25 21:32 ` Junio C Hamano
2018-07-26 13:41 ` [PATCH v2 " Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-08-03 7:20 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-08-03 16:40 ` Junio C Hamano
2018-08-03 17:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-08-03 16:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-08-03 17:43 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-08-04 8:52 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-08-03 17:45 ` brian m. carlson
2018-07-25 22:56 ` [PATCH " brian m. carlson
2018-06-11 21:19 ` Hash algorithm analysis Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-06-21 8:20 ` Johannes Schindelin
2018-06-21 22:39 ` brian m. carlson
2018-06-11 18:09 ` State of NewHash work, future directions, and discussion Duy Nguyen
2018-06-12 1:28 ` brian m. carlson
2018-06-11 19:01 ` Jonathan Nieder
2018-06-12 2:28 ` brian m. carlson
2018-06-12 2:42 ` Jonathan Nieder
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CANgJU+U+XEpBLQAZKkNTqcAKTfKqMStNBk2pr7wjLq2q+BELww@mail.gmail.com \
--to=demerphq@gmail.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=agl@google.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=keccak@noekeon.org \
--cc=sandals@crustytoothpaste.net \
--cc=sitaramc@gmail.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).