Anyone have recommendations for a cryptographic hash that’s reasonably secure but requires an /extremely/ small amount of both code and data memory? e.g. SHA256 is bad due to a 2048-bit magic constant, SHA3 is bad due to 1600-bit internal state
Replying to @comex
I assume sha256's magic number was chosen arbitrarily. Perhaps you could create a variant where the n-th word of magic number can be trivially calculated on-the-fly?
9:19 PM - 7 May 2018
0 replies
0 retweets
1 like
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.