Re: MD5 versus SHA -Reply

[kasten@ftp.com (Frank Kastenholz)]

 > Any chance of defining MD5-2?
 > 
 > One MAJOR flaw in MD5 is using little-endian (anti-"network standard"
 > byte order).
 > 
 > This means that big-endians incur a byte-reordering cost they don't
 > usually incur.
 > Little-endians already incur this cost, so it isn't an extra burden on them.

As long as we are getting into that argument, there are a lot more little
endian machines out there than big-endian. I'd rather we change all the
other things to be little endian.

--
Frank Kastenholz    "The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy
                     present... As our case is new, so we must think anew, and
                     act anew" - A. Lincoln

---

Follow-Ups:

• Re: MD5 versus SHA -Reply
• From: "Marcus J. Ranum" <mjr@tis.com>

---

• Prev by Date: Re: IBM's patented algorithm
• Next by Date: IPv6 Security Last Call Questions
• Prev by thread: Re: MD5 versus SHA -Reply
• Next by thread: Re: MD5 versus SHA -Reply
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread