←back to thread

98 points shlomo_z | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.392s | source
Show context
magicalhippo ◴[] No.45357640[source]
Not only is MD5 broken as shown here, if you have a modern CPU it's also quite slow compared to good, non-broken alternatives. See for example this comparison[1] (post says JavaScript but it's actually OpenSSL's implementation that's actually tested).

[1]: https://lemire.me/blog/2025/01/11/javascript-hashing-speed-c...

replies(1): >>45358261 #
gruez ◴[] No.45358261[source]
I only see new CPUs benchmarked, maybe that's because newer CPUs have SHA acceleration extensions? I'd expect SHA256 to be more complex and therefore be more computationally expensive.
replies(2): >>45358603 #>>45358721 #
1. adrian_b ◴[] No.45358721[source]
Hardware SHA-1 and SHA-256 are now supported by many CPUs, many of which are already older than a decade, i.e. almost all 64-bit ARM-based CPUs, all AMD Zen, many generations of Intel Atom and the Intel Core CPUs starting with Ice Lake.

The only CPUs still likely to be in use and without SHA support are the Intel Core CPUs until and including the Skylake derivatives (i.e. up to Comet Lake, i.e. up to 6 years ago).

The Intel Atoms have received SHA support many years before Intel Core, because they competed with ARM, which already had such support.

The support in Intel Core has been added due to AMD Zen, but the products with it have been delayed by the failure of Intel to achieve acceptable fabrication yields in their 10-nm CMOS process, before 2019/2020.