Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2013 09:15:05 +0530 From: Dhiru Kholia <dhiru.kholia@...il.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: BLAKE2 (was: New plugin load order magic) On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 6:58 AM, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jan 05, 2013 at 01:10:43AM +0100, magnum wrote: > the whole addition of BLAKE2 may need > discussion. If we add it at all, then we should have not only BLAKE2b, > but also BLAKE2s. The format names should probably be blake2b (not > blake2-512) and blake2s. Alternatively, we can use just blake2 (for > BLAKE2b aka BLAKE2) and blake2s (for BLAKE2s). Using name blake2 (for BLAKE2b aka BLAKE2) and blake2s (for BLAKE2s) sounds good. > Then, Dhiru included the slow reference implementation of BLAKE2b > instead of the SIMD implementations. I think we should include all SIMD > implementations that are available from BLAKE2 team, plus the reference > implementations for non-x86 and for older x86 CPUs. I can try doing this but I am not familiar with SIMD business. > This becomes some effort for unclear purpose. Publicity for JtR? > Being ready just in case? Anyway, I don't mind this being done. The > current low speeds that we have for BLAKE2b are not good publicity. Speed is not that bad on 64-bit machines. $ ../run/john -fo:raw-blake2-512 -t # 1 core of AMD FX-8120 Benchmarking: BLAKE2 512 [32/64]... DONE Raw: 2337K c/s real, 2337K c/s virtual -- Dhiru
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.