[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: truncation
Could someone remind us where the justification is for truncation? I
remember in San Jose, Hugo stood up and said it was a good idea. I don't
remember where it got discussed or what papers were referenced/etc. I
realize this probably went by sometime in the past two months but I don't
recall when.
At 08:19 PM 3/9/97 -0500, you wrote:
>> Yes, the HMAC hash's will be truncated to 96 bits. I hope to have the
>> "new" AH-HMAC drafts out sometime next week. I can't speak for
>> Jim Hughes draft.
>
>> Rob G.
>
>> Rob Adams wrote:
>> >
>> > Did we ever decide definitively on truncating MD5 and SHA hash's to
96 bits?
>> > I think we did but I just want to be clear.
>> >
>> > Also, how does this apply to the Hughes Combined transform? Do we
truncate
>> > the MD5 hash there also? I hope so for uniformity's sake.
>> >
>> > -Rob
>
>The MD5 truncation is not recommended.
>
>Hilarie
>
>
>
--------
Rodney Thayer <rodney@sabletech.com>
PGP Fingerprint: BB1B6428 409129AC 076B9DE1 4C250DD8