On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 03:53:53PM +0000, Dave Howe wrote:
I wasn't aware that FPGA technology had improved that much if any - feel free to correct my misapprehension in that area though :)
FPGAs are too slow (and too expensive), if you want lots of SHA-1 performance, use a crypto processor (or lots of forthcoming C5J mini-ITX boards), or an ASIC. Assuming, fast SHA-1 computation is the basis for the attack -- we do not know that. While looking, came across http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/02jul/slides/saag-1.pdf "We really DO NOT need SHA-256 for Message Authentication", mid-2002. -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature]