lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 21:56:52 +0100
From: Jean-Philippe Aumasson <>
Subject: Re: [PHC] PHC status report

On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 9:38 PM, Krisztián Pintér <> wrote:
> Solar Designer (at Wednesday, February 11, 2015, 9:27:16 PM):
>> Here's mine: discuss everything on the public list.
> isn't it what i'm asking for for many days, but to no avail?

We want panel members to feel free to give their opinions about
submissions relative merits and defects. Private, close discussions
are more appropriate for this than public discussions. One of the
reasons is that there'll always be individuals who will feel
personally offended by criticism of rejection of their proposal, and
as initiator of the project, I didn't wanted to expose panel members
to resentment of submitters.

I can understand the frustration of those whose submission was
rejected, especially if it required a significant amount of work/time.
When I learnt that Keccak was selected as SHA-3 rather than my
submission BLAKE, for a moment I hated NIST and felt that it was
unfair. Even when NIST gave their rationale I wasn't convinced and
wished I had the full recordings of NIST's deliberations, but that was
just for a moment.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists