Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Set correct collision resistance for Rpo256 #69

Closed
Tracked by #194
vlopes11 opened this issue Feb 20, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #236
Closed
Tracked by #194

Set correct collision resistance for Rpo256 #69

vlopes11 opened this issue Feb 20, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #236
Assignees
Labels
good first issue Good for newcomers
Milestone

Comments

@vlopes11
Copy link
Contributor

We are currently defining the collision resistance of Rpo256 as a constant for the type.

However, this will not always be true, as we might drop it to 126-bits, depending on the capacity registers setup.

Ideally, we should split the Rpo256 into two distinct types, and set the collision attribute/capacity setup strategies individually. This way, we would create a better distinction and unmistakable representation of what we should expect from the implementation.

We should evaluate the options we have available and solve the comment below.

Originally posted by @bobbinth in #68 (comment)

@vlopes11 vlopes11 added the good first issue Good for newcomers label Feb 21, 2023
@bobbinth bobbinth added this to the v0.8 milestone Jan 5, 2024
@bobbinth bobbinth linked a pull request Jan 17, 2024 that will close this issue
@bobbinth
Copy link
Contributor

Closed by #236.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
good first issue Good for newcomers
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants