Clever Geek Handbook

RIPEMD-160 vs. SHA-256

Can anyone shed some light on SHA-256 and RIPEMD-160 which algorithm is usually faster and what are the performance and space metrics, if any? By space comparisons, I do not mean 160 bits and 256 bits, but what is the collision rate, the difference in space requirements in env production. and time to calculate both. Is RIPEMD-160 a requirement for European countries? Any additional information that would be helpful in making a decision.

+2


source to share


3 answers


As far as SHA-256 is concerned, there are no known collisions. I believe that while some advances have been made in creating collisions in SHA-1 faster than brute force, that they are still impractical and certainly not applicable to SHA-256.



I am not very familiar with RIPEMD-160, so I cannot say much about it.

+1


source


RIPMD-160

can be used for any message size, and SHA

- 2^64-1

. and RIPMD-160

takes 160 steps during the process, while it SHA

takes only 80. I think it's RIPMD-160

better.



+1


source


Is RIPEMD-160 required for European countries?

Not.

0


source






More articles:


All Articles