On 01/10/2017 12:31 PM, Richard Levitte wrote: > > Benjamin Kaduk <bka...@akamai.com> skrev: (10 januari 2017 18:48:32 CET) >> On 01/09/2017 10:05 PM, Salz, Rich wrote: >>> Should we move to using SIPHash for the default string hashing >>> function in OpenSSL? It’s now in the kernel >>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/1/9/619 >>> >> Heck, yes! >> -Ben > I fail to see what that would give us. OPENSSL_LH_strhash() is used to get a > reasonable index for LHASH entries. Also SIPhash gives at least 64 bits > results, do we really expect to see large enough hash tables to warrant that? >
We don't need to use the full output width of a good hash function. My main point is, "why would we want to ignore the last 20 years of advancement in hash function research?" Section 7 of the siphash paper (https://131002.net/siphash/siphash.pdf) explicitly talks about using it for hash tables, including using hash table indices H(m) mod l. -Ben
-- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
