On Feb 13, 2014 7:57 AM, "Daniel McDonald" <daniel@cx.com> wrote: > > FYI Java 8 is adding support for SHA-224: http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/130 > > -- > Dan > > It appears they are doing so absent use-cases or compelling reason, and merely doing it for completion sake. I would like to avoid that, if possible. > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 3:19 AM, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org> wrote: >> >> 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 >> >> >> > > > > -- > > daniel g. mcdonald | software engineer | cx, inc. > (m) 480.326.4574 > skype: daniel.g.mcdonald | daniel@cx.com | www.cx.com
Received on Thursday, 13 February 2014 17:08:26 UTC