Hi Zooko,
Reading your excellent brief presentation of Tahoe-LAFS in the paper "Tahoe - The Least-Authority Filesystem", I learned that you are heavily using "secure hash", denoted SHA256d(x)=SHA256(SHA256(x)) both for Merkle trees, for hashing a master key and for writing mutable files. You have decided to use SHA256d(x) because this construction prevents length-extension attacks. Having in mind that the SHA-3 candidates by default are resistant against length-extension attacks, that some of them are significantly faster than SHA256 (and consequently even more significantly faster than SHA256d(x) ), I am interested does Tahoe- LAFS code allows easy "plug-and-play" replacement of SHA256d(x) with other hash functions for experimental performance measurements? I am one of the designers of Blue Midnight Wish hash function and that is why I am interested in this matter. According to your opinion, is this effort worthwhile for overall performance of Tahoe-LAFS? If yes - in the next advertisement of Master Thesis / research projects for my students I can give such a task for one or two students - to perform extensive measurements for all 14 Second round candidates. The next project assignments for my students will be in May 2010 but I have to precisely define the projects until Monday 19th April 2010 - any concrete suggestions in this direction are welcome. Best regards, Prof. Danilo Gligoroski, Department of Telematics, NTNU - Norway
_______________________________________________ tahoe-dev mailing list [email protected] http://allmydata.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev
