On 15 May 2013 07:03, Jonathan Aquilina <eagles051387@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not trying to hijack this thread, but I studied in my security class that
> SHA1 is being attacked so to speak in terms of crypto analysis and it was
> suggested in the book that it not be used but something like SHA512 be used
> instead.
>
Hello Jonathan,
Your professor is correct: SHA1 is not recommended for new development.
However, as it is very widely used, we will still need to support it
for a very long time.
--
Ard.
> Just to give you all a heads up :)
>
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) <tixy@linaro.org>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 2013-05-14 at 14:16 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> > These assembler implementations of SHA1 and AES have been
>> > in the upstream source tree since September 2012 but need
>> > to be selected explicitly in order to be enabled.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
>> > ---
>> > linaro/configs/linaro-base.conf | 2 ++
>> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/linaro/configs/linaro-base.conf
>> > b/linaro/configs/linaro-base.conf
>> > index 5c748a7..ba7b97b 100644
>> > --- a/linaro/configs/linaro-base.conf
>> > +++ b/linaro/configs/linaro-base.conf
>> > @@ -86,3 +86,5 @@ CONFIG_HW_PERF_EVENTS=y
>> > CONFIG_FUNCTION_TRACER=y
>> > CONFIG_ENABLE_DEFAULT_TRACERS=y
>> > CONFIG_PROC_DEVICETREE=y
>> > +CONFIG_CRYPTO_AES_ARM=y
>> > +CONFIG_CRYPTO_SHA1_ARM=y
>>
>> This also enables CONFIG_CRYPTO_SHA1 which we didn't already have
>> enabled in our builds, so I assume nothing actually needs this option.
>> If that's true, then it doesn't seem worth enabling an optimised version
>> of code which isn't going to be used. ;-)
>>
>> --
>> Tixy
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> linaro-dev mailing list
>> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
>> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>
>
>
>
> --
> Jonathan Aquilina