Talk:SHA-1: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(→Warning highlighting: new section) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
We might want to set this up like [[MD5]] and [[MD5/Implementation]] just to keep things consistent. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 21:40, 18 January 2012 (UTC) |
We might want to set this up like [[MD5]] and [[MD5/Implementation]] just to keep things consistent. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 21:40, 18 January 2012 (UTC) |
||
: Some implementations of MD5 are still on [[MD5]] and not on [[MD5/Implementation]]. If someone creates SHA-1/Implementation, please move the Ruby implementation from here to there. If I later create RIPEMD-160, SHA-256, or so on, I might not immediately create /Implementation pages. --[[User:Kernigh|Kernigh]] 19:23, 19 January 2012 (UTC) |
|||
== Warning highlighting == |
== Warning highlighting == |
||
That highlighted warning should probably go into a centered infobox to make it more visible. –[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 10:45, 19 January 2012 (UTC) |
That highlighted warning should probably go into a centered infobox to make it more visible. –[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 10:45, 19 January 2012 (UTC) |
||
: What kind of warning is appropriate for SHA-1? [http://docs.factorcode.org/ Factor's documentation] for [http://docs.factorcode.org/content/article-checksums.sha.html SHA] says, "SHA-1 is considered insecure, while SHA-2 It is generally considered to be pretty strong." OpenBSD [http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=sha1&apropos=0&sektion=1&manpath=OpenBSD+5.0&arch=i386&format=html sha(1)] gives no warning at all, though OpenBSD [http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=md5&apropos=0&sektion=1&manpath=OpenBSD+5.0&arch=i386&format=html md5(1)] gives a warning and recommends sha256. --[[User:Kernigh|Kernigh]] 19:23, 19 January 2012 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 19:23, 19 January 2012
Implementations separated
We might want to set this up like MD5 and MD5/Implementation just to keep things consistent. --Mwn3d 21:40, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
- Some implementations of MD5 are still on MD5 and not on MD5/Implementation. If someone creates SHA-1/Implementation, please move the Ruby implementation from here to there. If I later create RIPEMD-160, SHA-256, or so on, I might not immediately create /Implementation pages. --Kernigh 19:23, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Warning highlighting
That highlighted warning should probably go into a centered infobox to make it more visible. –Donal Fellows 10:45, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
- What kind of warning is appropriate for SHA-1? Factor's documentation for SHA says, "SHA-1 is considered insecure, while SHA-2 It is generally considered to be pretty strong." OpenBSD sha(1) gives no warning at all, though OpenBSD md5(1) gives a warning and recommends sha256. --Kernigh 19:23, 19 January 2012 (UTC)