Re: [Exist-development] LGPL 2.1 and GPL 2 and all that crap

[Dannes W. <da...@ex...>]

Hi,  



On Monday, 6 February 2012 at 19:56 , Adam Retter wrote:

> If I understand correctly, is that not just the implementation of the
> algorithm? SHA-1 has been proven several times to have weaknesses and
> each time its proven the feasibility of the attack has significantly
> increased. In fact the US Government now recommends that government
> departments use SHA-2 or better and not SHA-1.


well we are not building a bank do we?  
  
> Yes there is SHA-2, however its 256bit whereas RIPEMD-160 is just 160bits. RIPEMD-160 should be faster (less computationally intensive)
> than SHA-2 if I understand correctly, and in addition requires less
> memory and storage for the digest. Like SHA-1, SHA-2 was also
> developed in private in a proprietary way, unlike RIPEMD-160.

I am sure that SHA-x  is well optimized in the JDK……… In the 'proprietary' I do not really see an argument, sorry :-) It is the result that counts, SHA-x is good…..

cheers

Dannes



--  
eXist-db Native XML Database - http://exist-db.org
Join us on linked-in: http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=35624