Re: making SHA-512 as fast as MD5

"Wei Dai" <usenet@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Mike Amling wrote:
If you're proposing a "variant of SHA-512", then I think you need a
term other than "SHA-512" to denote your variant, to distinguish it
from the NIST's SHA-512.

Sure, I'll give it a name when there's a concrete proposal with all of
the details defined. Right now it's more of an idea for discussion,
and we can just refer to it as a "Rumba20-style SHA-512 variant" for
the moment. I'd like to avoid polluting the namespace of cryptographic
algorithms if there's something obviously wrong with the idea. :)

It's got to be dance themed, Shirley?

SHA-SHA-SHA (might need reducing to 3 blocks rather than 4)
maSHAd potato

"Home taping is killing big business profits. We left this side blank
so you can help." -- Dead Kennedys, written upon the B-side of tapes of
/In God We Trust, Inc./.