Subject: Re: Questions about the hash function transition

From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2018 17:20:04 +0200

On Thu, Aug 23 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <[email-masked]> writes:
>
>>> - The trailer consists of the following:
>>>   - A copy of the 20-byte SHA-256 checksum at the end of the
>>>     corresponding packfile.
>>>
>>>   - 20-byte SHA-256 checksum of all of the above.
>>
>> We need to update both of these to 32 byte, right? Or are we planning to
>> truncate the checksums?
>
> https://public-inbox.org/git/[email-masked]/

Thanks.

Yeah for this checksum purpose even 10 or 5 characters would do, but
since we'll need a new pack format anyway for SHA-256 why not just use
the full length of the SHA-256 here? We're using the full length of the
SHA-1.

I don't see it mattering for security / corruption detection purposes,
but just to avoid confusion. We'll have this one place left where
something looks like a SHA-1, but is actually a trunctated SHA-256.