The Pure Crypto Project's Hash Function

[Rich Salz]

> Because it is "cheap" and not because the users understand what they are
> doing. There may be other reasons, but none of them is "clarity" or
> "conciousness of what's going on".

So you expect end users to understand modular exponentiation?
You expect them to understand a brand-new hashing mechanism built on
modexp?  You expect them to be able to evaluate this brand-new
mechanism against an industry standard which has had years of study
(albeit perhaps not by Dobbertin :)?

Users are not capabable of evaluating cryptography.

You sir, do not seem to have enough of a world view to be inventing it.

> neccessary to regain control over what you do when you use
> crypto PCP is a very, very good approach!
>
> So please elaborate on your concept of "good" and "bad".

Very simple:  known to be cryptographically secure.  SHA-1 is good.  Your
invention is bad.  End of discussion (from me).
	/r$



---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo at metzdowd.com