- From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 11:19:48 +0100
- To: Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>, "public-webcrypto@w3.org" <public-webcrypto@w3.org>, Israel Hilerio <israelh@microsoft.com>, Richard Barnes <rbarnes@mozilla.com>, Alexey Proskuryakov <ap@webkit.org>
On 02/13/2014 06:28 AM, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
> Are there any objections for removing SHA-224?
>
> I note, for example, that Microsoft has chosen not to implement
> SHA-224. It provides less security as SHA-256, but at the same
> performance cost.
>
> I'm trying to think of a compelling reason for implementors to
> implement SHA-224, and I can't find one, other than for completion
> sake. Do we have any use cases for it?
>
I was always under the impression that implementing less secure
primitives was only to be justified by real-world use-cases, not
completeness. Thus, I support the editor's removal of SHA-224.
cheers,
harry
Received on Thursday, 13 February 2014 10:19:58 UTC