BLAKE2, an improved version of the SHA-3 finalist BLAKE optimized for speed
1–10 of 34 posts
Re: BLAKE2, an improved version of the SHA-3 finalist BLAKE optimized for speed
#2I'm not sure how reduced memory requirements are a benefit to encryption. Are there really any low end systems still in use today that actually have issues with memory usage? Even $150 notebooks come with 1 gig of ram. This seems more like it would help save ram on interception devices like the Narus Device or the huge datacenters owned by the NSA, which have a huge issue with storing all the data required to intercept and decrypt eavesdropped communications reliably.
Re: BLAKE2, an improved version of the SHA-3 finalist BLAKE optimized for speed
#3I'm not sure how reduced memory requirements are a benefit to encryption. Are there really any low end systems still in use today that actually have issues with memory usage? Even $150 notebooks come with 1 gig of ram. This seems more like it would help save ram on interception devices like the Narus Device or the huge datacenters owned by the NSA, which have a huge issue with storing all the data required to interce…
Think smart cards.
Re: BLAKE2, an improved version of the SHA-3 finalist BLAKE optimized for speed
#4I'm not sure how reduced memory requirements are a benefit to encryption. Are there really any low end systems still in use today that actually have issues with memory usage? Even $150 notebooks come with 1 gig of ram. This seems more like it would help save ram on interception devices like the Narus Device or the huge datacenters owned by the NSA, which have a huge issue with storing all the data required to interce…
Think smart cards.
Some kind of next generation smart card, no doubt. Like a universal ID, replacement for mobile payment methods and Apple Passbook, since people don't trust their carriers to be reliable, unbiased communication networks or platforms... ah yes, I see.
Re: BLAKE2, an improved version of the SHA-3 finalist BLAKE optimized for speed
#5I'm not sure how reduced memory requirements are a benefit to encryption. Are there really any low end systems still in use today that actually have issues with memory usage? Even $150 notebooks come with 1 gig of ram. This seems more like it would help save ram on interception devices like the Narus Device or the huge datacenters owned by the NSA, which have a huge issue with storing all the data required to interce…
I think of reduced memory requirements as a benefit to every application, including encryption. That's because nearly every application I use competes for memory; I also use memory as general storage media for stuff for which I want fast I/O and/or don't need to save permanently (e.g. mfs or tmpfs mounts). I think of memory as a precious resource.
Re: BLAKE2, an improved version of the SHA-3 finalist BLAKE optimized for speed
#6I'm not sure how reduced memory requirements are a benefit to encryption. Are there really any low end systems still in use today that actually have issues with memory usage? Even $150 notebooks come with 1 gig of ram. This seems more like it would help save ram on interception devices like the Narus Device or the huge datacenters owned by the NSA, which have a huge issue with storing all the data required to interce…
I think of reduced memory requirements as a benefit to every application, including encryption. That's because nearly every application I use competes for memory; I also use memory as general storage media for stuff for which I want fast I/O and/or don't need to save permanently (e.g. mfs or tmpfs mounts). I think of memory as a precious resource.
Think of encryption as more secure the harder it is to do. Optimizing encryption for the benefit of other applications is backwards.
Re: BLAKE2, an improved version of the SHA-3 finalist BLAKE optimized for speed
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think of reduced memory requirements as a benefit to every application, including encryption. That's because nearly every application I use competes for memory; I also use memory as general storage media for stuff for which I want fast I/O and/or don't need to save permanently (e.g. mfs or tmpfs mounts). I think of memory as a precious resource.
Think of encryption as more secure the harder it is to do. Optimizing encryption for the benefit of other applications is backwards.
[deleted]
Re: BLAKE2, an improved version of the SHA-3 finalist BLAKE optimized for speed
#8A little off topic, but since it's on the page: Is it only me or does "mebibyte" simply look wrong?
You can't just decide that people aren't supposed to say "megabyte" anymore
Re: BLAKE2, an improved version of the SHA-3 finalist BLAKE optimized for speed
#9Does this mean that this variant will be resubmmited as SHA-3?
Re: BLAKE2, an improved version of the SHA-3 finalist BLAKE optimized for speed
#10A little off topic, but since it's on the page: Is it only me or does "mebibyte" simply look wrong? You can't just decide that people aren't supposed to say "megabyte" anymore
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mebibyte
It's becoming more common. By the way, if you use OS X, your utilities output megabytes (1000 bytes), not mebibytes. GNU utilities switched to KiB, MiB, etc. (1024 bytes).