[Hipsec] How much for that hash?
Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.com> Tue, 08 June 2010 19:40 UTC
Return-Path: <rgm@htt-consult.com>
X-Original-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6BCF3A67D4 for <hipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 12:40:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.645
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.645 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.756, BAYES_05=-1.11]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MmT0zdXvPwaO for <hipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 12:40:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com (klovia.htt-consult.com [208.83.67.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E26FB3A67A7 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 12:40:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E606868B63 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 19:33:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (klovia.htt-consult.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b0NUqKW+d2W3 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:33:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from nc2400.htt-consult.com (h155.home.htt [208.83.67.155]) (Authenticated sender: rgm@htt-consult.com) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 35E0B68B47 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:33:23 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <4C0E9CBD.20600@htt-consult.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 15:40:45 -0400
From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100430 Fedora/3.0.4-2.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: HIP WG <hipsec@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Hipsec] How much for that hash?
X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." <hipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hipsec>
List-Post: <mailto:hipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 19:40:57 -0000
It is really being driven home to me how important a cryptographic hash is to a total security solution. Trying to design around this is really hard! So since the argument for not using a hash is the code cost, can anyone supply me with a good value for the amount of code (in Kb) for SHA-1? For SHA-256? Thank you.
- [Hipsec] How much for that hash? Robert Moskowitz
- Re: [Hipsec] How much for that hash? Miika Komu
- Re: [Hipsec] How much for that hash? Andrew McGregor
- [Hipsec] How much for that hash? Tero Kivinen