Subject: SHA256 ?

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 15:49:21 +0200

isn't it time to define new algorithm numbers for SHA2 ?
8 for SHA256 (and maybe 9,10 for SHA384,512?)

the bigger problem however is with OIDs...
none of SHA2 have OIDs defined, just like HAVAL and TIGER :(

== <EOF> ==
Disastry  http://i.am/disastry/
http://disastry.dhs.org/pgp <----PGP plugins for Netscape and MDaemon
 ^---PGP 2.6.3ia-multi03 (supports IDEA, CAST5, BLOWFISH, TWOFISH,
     AES, 3DES ciphers and MD5, SHA1, RIPEMD160 hashes)

---

From: Jon Callas <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 08:53:35 -0700

At 3:49 PM +0200 4/11/01, [email-masked] wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>

That is, in fact, the bigger problem. We can either finesse it -- we agree
on an OID to use for them -- or we wait for some other OID space to assign
them.

	Jon
--

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 11:16:25 +0200

> on an OID to use for them -- or we wait for some other OID space to assign

there is OIDs for SHA256, SHA384, SHA512 !

   The ASN.1 OIDs are:
     - SHA256:     2.16.840.1.101.3.4.2.1
     - SHA384:     2.16.840.1.101.3.4.2.2
     - SHA512:     2.16.840.1.101.3.4.2.3
   The hexadecimal representations are:
     - SHA256:     0x60, 0x86, 0x48, 0x01, 0x65, 0x03, 0x04, 0x02, 0x01
     - SHA384:     0x60, 0x86, 0x48, 0x01, 0x65, 0x03, 0x04, 0x02, 0x02
     - SHA512:     0x60, 0x86, 0x48, 0x01, 0x65, 0x03, 0x04, 0x02, 0x03
so
   The full hash prefixes for these are:
       SHA256:     0x30, 0x31, 0x30, 0x0d, 0x06, 0x09, 0x60, 0x86,
                   0x48, 0x01, 0x65, 0x03, 0x04, 0x02, 0x01, 0x05,
                   0x00, 0x04, 0x20
       SHA384:     0x30, 0x41, 0x30, 0x0d, 0x06, 0x09, 0x60, 0x86,
                   0x48, 0x01, 0x65, 0x03, 0x04, 0x02, 0x02, 0x05,
                   0x00, 0x04, 0x30
       SHA512:     0x30, 0x51, 0x30, 0x0d, 0x06, 0x09, 0x60, 0x86,
                   0x48, 0x01, 0x65, 0x03, 0x04, 0x02, 0x03, 0x05,
                   0x00, 0x04, 0x40

so how about assigning algorithm numbers for SHA2:
       ID           Algorithm                             Text Name
       --           ---------                             ---- ----
       8          - SHA256                                "SHA256"
       9          - SHA384                                "SHA384"
       10         - SHA512                                "SHA512"

?

== <EOF> ==
 ^--GPG for Win32 (supports loadable modules and IDEA)

---

From: "Michael Young" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 12:22:11 -0400

> isn't it time to define new algorithm numbers for SHA2 ?

I really don't understand the rush.  Last I checked, the new
variants were not even *draft* FIPS.

At the same time, I note that ECDSA is FIPS-approved, and has
a reserved algorithm number, but no details.

Note that I don't think NIST approval should always dictate inclusion
in OpenPGP, but at least in the SHA-256+ cases, they were
the originator and they may tweak them if something comes up during
evaluation (as happened with SHA-1).