SHAKE-128/256 or SHA3-256/512Use case for extendable-output functions (XOF) such as SHAKE128/SHAKE256What are the practical differences between 256-bit, 192-bit, and 128-bit AES encryption?How secure would HMAC-SHA3 be?Should HMAC-SHA3 be preferred over H(C(k,M))?Crypto++ and SHA3Questions about SHA and SHAKESHA3 HMAC key paddingShake 128/256 Output Length RestrictionsStrength of Hash obtained by XOR of parts of SHA3Is it secure to hash an AES key?SHA3 hardware implementation

Given 0s on Assignments with suspected and dismissed cheating?

Can I pay my credit card?

Usage of the relative pronoun "dont"

Why do galaxies collide?

A person lacking money who shows off a lot

What is this rubber on gear cables

Why would company (decision makers) wait for someone to retire, rather than lay them off, when their role is no longer needed?

Why does Taylor’s series “work”?

Have there been any examples of re-usable rockets in the past?

Is there a method to separate iron from mercury?

FIFO data structure in pure C

Why didn't Daenerys' advisers suggest assassinating Cersei?

Canadian citizen who is presently in litigation with a US-based company

"Counterexample" for the Inverse function theorem

Is it possible to pass a pointer to an operator as an argument like a pointer to a function?

Solenoid fastest possible release - for how long should reversed polarity be applied?

Would a "ring language" be possible?

A latin word for "area of interest"

Pedaling at different gear ratios on flat terrain: what's the point?

How can I make dummy text (like lipsum) grey?

Would life always name the light from their sun "white"

Why aren't satellites disintegrated even though they orbit earth within their Roche Limits?

Non-African Click Languages

What dog breeds survive the apocalypse for generations?



SHAKE-128/256 or SHA3-256/512


Use case for extendable-output functions (XOF) such as SHAKE128/SHAKE256What are the practical differences between 256-bit, 192-bit, and 128-bit AES encryption?How secure would HMAC-SHA3 be?Should HMAC-SHA3 be preferred over H(C(k,M))?Crypto++ and SHA3Questions about SHA and SHAKESHA3 HMAC key paddingShake 128/256 Output Length RestrictionsStrength of Hash obtained by XOR of parts of SHA3Is it secure to hash an AES key?SHA3 hardware implementation













2












$begingroup$


Would it be better to use SHAKE-128/256 or SHA3-256/512? In what situation should I chose one over the other?










share|improve this question









New contributor



Alejandro Martinez is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$
















    2












    $begingroup$


    Would it be better to use SHAKE-128/256 or SHA3-256/512? In what situation should I chose one over the other?










    share|improve this question









    New contributor



    Alejandro Martinez is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






    $endgroup$














      2












      2








      2


      1



      $begingroup$


      Would it be better to use SHAKE-128/256 or SHA3-256/512? In what situation should I chose one over the other?










      share|improve this question









      New contributor



      Alejandro Martinez is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      $endgroup$




      Would it be better to use SHAKE-128/256 or SHA3-256/512? In what situation should I chose one over the other?







      encryption sha-3






      share|improve this question









      New contributor



      Alejandro Martinez is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.










      share|improve this question









      New contributor



      Alejandro Martinez is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.








      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 3 hours ago









      Maarten Bodewes

      56.6k681200




      56.6k681200






      New contributor



      Alejandro Martinez is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.








      asked 5 hours ago









      Alejandro MartinezAlejandro Martinez

      112




      112




      New contributor



      Alejandro Martinez is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




      New contributor




      Alejandro Martinez is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          6












          $begingroup$


          And in which case would it be more interesting to use one or another?




          So SHA3-$n$ offers $n$ bits of security against preimage and second-preimage attacks and $n/2$ bits of security against collision attacks.
          On the other side SHAKE-$n$ offers at $n$ bits of security against preimage and second-preimage attacks and also $n$ bits of security against collision attacks (assuming the digest is at least $2n$ bits long). So when to use which?



          • When you are forced to use "an approved hash function", you use SHA3, because SHAKE doesn't qualify.

          • When you need a really long hash output (or an XOF in general), you use SHAKE.

          • When you really need more than 256 bits of security against preimage or second-preimage attacks you use SHA3.

          • When you want to be compatible with more other systems, you probably want to use SHA3.

          • When speed matters to you (and you still want to use SHA3 / SHAKE) and you are happy with an all-arond $n$-bit security level (for $nin128,256$), you use SHAKE.

          This last point follows from the fact that the higher preimage resistance in SHA3 is paid for with lower rate (=number of new bits processed per internal permutation invocation) which is usually higher in SHAKE than in SHA3 (SHAKE256 has the same as SHA3-256).






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "281"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader:
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            ,
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );






            Alejandro Martinez is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcrypto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f70565%2fshake-128-256-or-sha3-256-512%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            6












            $begingroup$


            And in which case would it be more interesting to use one or another?




            So SHA3-$n$ offers $n$ bits of security against preimage and second-preimage attacks and $n/2$ bits of security against collision attacks.
            On the other side SHAKE-$n$ offers at $n$ bits of security against preimage and second-preimage attacks and also $n$ bits of security against collision attacks (assuming the digest is at least $2n$ bits long). So when to use which?



            • When you are forced to use "an approved hash function", you use SHA3, because SHAKE doesn't qualify.

            • When you need a really long hash output (or an XOF in general), you use SHAKE.

            • When you really need more than 256 bits of security against preimage or second-preimage attacks you use SHA3.

            • When you want to be compatible with more other systems, you probably want to use SHA3.

            • When speed matters to you (and you still want to use SHA3 / SHAKE) and you are happy with an all-arond $n$-bit security level (for $nin128,256$), you use SHAKE.

            This last point follows from the fact that the higher preimage resistance in SHA3 is paid for with lower rate (=number of new bits processed per internal permutation invocation) which is usually higher in SHAKE than in SHA3 (SHAKE256 has the same as SHA3-256).






            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$

















              6












              $begingroup$


              And in which case would it be more interesting to use one or another?




              So SHA3-$n$ offers $n$ bits of security against preimage and second-preimage attacks and $n/2$ bits of security against collision attacks.
              On the other side SHAKE-$n$ offers at $n$ bits of security against preimage and second-preimage attacks and also $n$ bits of security against collision attacks (assuming the digest is at least $2n$ bits long). So when to use which?



              • When you are forced to use "an approved hash function", you use SHA3, because SHAKE doesn't qualify.

              • When you need a really long hash output (or an XOF in general), you use SHAKE.

              • When you really need more than 256 bits of security against preimage or second-preimage attacks you use SHA3.

              • When you want to be compatible with more other systems, you probably want to use SHA3.

              • When speed matters to you (and you still want to use SHA3 / SHAKE) and you are happy with an all-arond $n$-bit security level (for $nin128,256$), you use SHAKE.

              This last point follows from the fact that the higher preimage resistance in SHA3 is paid for with lower rate (=number of new bits processed per internal permutation invocation) which is usually higher in SHAKE than in SHA3 (SHAKE256 has the same as SHA3-256).






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$















                6












                6








                6





                $begingroup$


                And in which case would it be more interesting to use one or another?




                So SHA3-$n$ offers $n$ bits of security against preimage and second-preimage attacks and $n/2$ bits of security against collision attacks.
                On the other side SHAKE-$n$ offers at $n$ bits of security against preimage and second-preimage attacks and also $n$ bits of security against collision attacks (assuming the digest is at least $2n$ bits long). So when to use which?



                • When you are forced to use "an approved hash function", you use SHA3, because SHAKE doesn't qualify.

                • When you need a really long hash output (or an XOF in general), you use SHAKE.

                • When you really need more than 256 bits of security against preimage or second-preimage attacks you use SHA3.

                • When you want to be compatible with more other systems, you probably want to use SHA3.

                • When speed matters to you (and you still want to use SHA3 / SHAKE) and you are happy with an all-arond $n$-bit security level (for $nin128,256$), you use SHAKE.

                This last point follows from the fact that the higher preimage resistance in SHA3 is paid for with lower rate (=number of new bits processed per internal permutation invocation) which is usually higher in SHAKE than in SHA3 (SHAKE256 has the same as SHA3-256).






                share|improve this answer









                $endgroup$




                And in which case would it be more interesting to use one or another?




                So SHA3-$n$ offers $n$ bits of security against preimage and second-preimage attacks and $n/2$ bits of security against collision attacks.
                On the other side SHAKE-$n$ offers at $n$ bits of security against preimage and second-preimage attacks and also $n$ bits of security against collision attacks (assuming the digest is at least $2n$ bits long). So when to use which?



                • When you are forced to use "an approved hash function", you use SHA3, because SHAKE doesn't qualify.

                • When you need a really long hash output (or an XOF in general), you use SHAKE.

                • When you really need more than 256 bits of security against preimage or second-preimage attacks you use SHA3.

                • When you want to be compatible with more other systems, you probably want to use SHA3.

                • When speed matters to you (and you still want to use SHA3 / SHAKE) and you are happy with an all-arond $n$-bit security level (for $nin128,256$), you use SHAKE.

                This last point follows from the fact that the higher preimage resistance in SHA3 is paid for with lower rate (=number of new bits processed per internal permutation invocation) which is usually higher in SHAKE than in SHA3 (SHAKE256 has the same as SHA3-256).







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered 5 hours ago









                SEJPMSEJPM

                30k659142




                30k659142




















                    Alejandro Martinez is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









                    draft saved

                    draft discarded


















                    Alejandro Martinez is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                    Alejandro Martinez is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











                    Alejandro Martinez is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Cryptography Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid


                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcrypto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f70565%2fshake-128-256-or-sha3-256-512%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Log på Navigationsmenu

                    Creating second map without labels using QGIS?How to lock map labels for inset map in Print Composer?How to Force the Showing of Labels of a Vector File in QGISQGIS Valmiera, Labels only show for part of polygonsRemoving duplicate point labels in QGISLabeling every feature using QGIS?Show labels for point features outside map canvasAbbreviate Road Labels in QGIS only when requiredExporting map from composer in QGIS - text labels have moved in output?How to make sure labels in qgis turn up in layout map?Writing label expression with ArcMap and If then Statement?

                    Nuuk Indholdsfortegnelse Etyomologi | Historie | Geografi | Transport og infrastruktur | Politik og administration | Uddannelsesinstitutioner | Kultur | Venskabsbyer | Noter | Eksterne henvisninger | Se også | Navigationsmenuwww.sermersooq.gl64°10′N 51°45′V / 64.167°N 51.750°V / 64.167; -51.75064°10′N 51°45′V / 64.167°N 51.750°V / 64.167; -51.750DMI - KlimanormalerSalmonsen, s. 850Grønlands Naturinstitut undersøger rensdyr i Akia og Maniitsoq foråret 2008Grønlands NaturinstitutNy vej til Qinngorput indviet i dagAntallet af biler i Nuuk må begrænsesNy taxacentral mødt med demonstrationKøreplan. Rute 1, 2 og 3SnescootersporNuukNord er for storSkoler i Kommuneqarfik SermersooqAtuarfik Samuel KleinschmidtKangillinguit AtuarfiatNuussuup AtuarfiaNuuk Internationale FriskoleIlinniarfissuaq, Grønlands SeminariumLedelseÅrsberetning for 2008Kunst og arkitekturÅrsberetning for 2008Julie om naturenNuuk KunstmuseumSilamiutGrønlands Nationalmuseum og ArkivStatistisk ÅrbogGrønlands LandsbibliotekStore koncerter på stribeVandhund nummer 1.000.000Kommuneqarfik Sermersooq – MalikForsidenVenskabsbyerLyngby-Taarbæk i GrønlandArctic Business NetworkWinter Cities 2008 i NuukDagligt opdaterede satellitbilleder fra NuukområdetKommuneqarfik Sermersooqs hjemmesideTurist i NuukGrønlands Statistiks databankGrønlands Hjemmestyres valgresultaterrrWorldCat124325457671310-5