I'm going to guess the latter, but just wanted to ask here.
I want to have a relatively short signature, and my goal is to take a substring of the resulting hash.
Asked
Active
Viewed 372 times
1
-
Duplicate of HMAC-SHA1 vs HMAC-SHA256 and HMAC-SHA1 vs HMAC-SHA256 for data storage. In sum, use HMAC-SHA-256 because SHA-1 shouldn't be used for any new protocols, but HMAC-SHA-1 isn't broken. – samuel-lucas6 Nov 27 '22 at 08:18
-
HMAC doesn't depend on collision resistance of the hash used, so HMAC-SHA1 isn't insecure. However, as a general practice, it's always better to HMAC-SHA256 for newer implementations – user93353 Nov 27 '22 at 10:30
-
1@samuel-lucas6 Neither directly addresses the substring issue, although it is mentioned in one of the comments in the first question. That said, taking a substring from a well distributed randomized value doesn't alter the strength of the algorithm. Uh, maybe that's the answer :) – Maarten Bodewes Nov 27 '22 at 16:39
-
Are you asking about HMAC-SHA1 with a 160-bit tag vs plain SHA-256 truncated to 160 bits? – forest Nov 27 '22 at 22:47
-
yes that's what I meant – Gregory Magarshak Nov 28 '22 at 03:12