4
$\begingroup$

I'm working with Arduino and hash-based signatures which are signature schemes that use only hash functions. Due to the constraints of an Arduino I was thinking about using SHA1 as the underlying function of my hash-based signature. But I'm not sure if it still makes sense to use SHA1 due to its vulnerabilities. Is there a scenario in which would be acceptable to use SHA1?

| improve this question | |
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I suppose it depends on the specific scheme but e.g. in this paper the security proof relies on second preimage resistance, for which SHA1 would still be fine. $\endgroup$ – puzzlepalace Jun 26 '17 at 19:02
  • $\begingroup$ Note however, that you would need to avoid pre-hashing with SHA-1 which may or may not be tricky. $\endgroup$ – SEJPM♦ Jun 26 '17 at 19:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ fwiw, sha256 runs faster on ardunio than sha1. $\endgroup$ – dandavis Jun 26 '17 at 19:47
6
$\begingroup$

No, use SHA256.

If you look at https://bench.cr.yp.to/results-hash.html it seems that SHA256 would probably be the better choice concerning speed as well. Therefore I don't see a good reason to go with SHA-1.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.