220 12455 <8d49458f-9c71-46d5-b5b3-7cbc78378546@isocpp.org> article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Olaf van der Spek Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Cryptographic hash functions reloaded [was Interest in cryptographic functions within the standard library] Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2014 07:36:26 -0700 (PDT) Lines: 59 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: <8d49458f-9c71-46d5-b5b3-7cbc78378546@isocpp.org> References: <53F8F620.3090701@gmx.de> <53F9AAF7.8030602@gmx.de> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_19_942100050.1408890986868" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1408891000 26040 80.91.229.3 (24 Aug 2014 14:36:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2014 14:36:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: lotharlutz@gmx.de To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBC5NB45SSABBB27Q46PQKGQEQBNWDVI@isocpp.org Sun Aug 24 16:36:33 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-ob0-f198.google.com ([209.85.214.198]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XLYuD-0006GP-51 for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 16:36:29 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-ob0-f198.google.com with SMTP id wp18sf73536423obc.9 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 07:36:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=MHHL9CsPHh9UPjxlSggwYhA7XNPSr1mpN/rMI+CA4KY=; b=pqGHl2o92IOMWbWe3F01qXd7fo1y8gwRM8SKmCSumAJxUEdXKJqauuAJ0a+3jF+Uwv 8GCr4e79bh0+rEkRLH6nLbeodP3ZBz/fIY/GrItuIVc0xPMB6y7OHNEGgVd/T7Ska4ZP i3i7ILSuDKtrEcdyg1i3R+9kvQ3/ImNEI2I1Y9qw2K3yyNVZGss+Yvvs/60ksQqGATRv TUFR00+nGBMgw/DyIEzRCEUmX/FeFboLAtyxUwqaUI98hG7cbywO7NY9s9MScv8+hHGi nvLW1O+G/Db+TgOV/bjsn3w4E3hV9kHphq3lXlRHPXV6wAJMxi5ZXXZpw5/OvYAVaMNM u/Mw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=MHHL9CsPHh9UPjxlSggwYhA7XNPSr1mpN/rMI+CA4KY=; b=ISMdLM61obMdhlzIY/8IDoLSGHCpaKqckTzq7q5CVwjj6fQbNLSG01myqBLRwFUJOZ JJEFEuJT0z4xnyvZnBDWZqnRNaHpxOcECdlS9Db5hrCAUi1UruU5yvoboBQFw98K5NSY TJ9mbHAITufIlna4lPdWTJVMFu0AXhHgEtLJZVpXPil5Tg08lTLfwHfth48ZTMSlrrC5 zLYDQjcl/dHUfaHlyMpe8TPfXJoTK0zxOWtA5uBe3Yd7BWl6v+jFJDVTowVJrS0R7aDT 0YLolDXatHE3ccOgsHCggA9YvHRkDn6jgdXsx1zHpE9B19BVW56eDU09KCmrnRhTg63u 97cw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnbnM6dexwryP4GIYZOFwIZ1JtrLSlZiW2EH0tHjHlvn/IbMlsO5hC4RCeqeaLV2GiOpphW X-Received: by 10.50.92.104 with SMTP id cl8mr6856378igb.1.1408890988110; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 07:36:28 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.140.38.176 with SMTP id t45ls1715998qgt.60.gmail; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 07:36:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.140.27.140 with SMTP id 12mr902qgx.19.1408890987384; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 07:36:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <53F9AAF7.8030602@gmx.de> X-Original-Sender: olafvdspek@gmail.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:12455 Archived-At: ------=_Part_19_942100050.1408890986868 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sunday, August 24, 2014 11:06:02 AM UTC+2, Markus Mayer wrote: > > -Why not add/delete algorithm XXX? > I think these are the most common. But I am open to suggestions. > > bcrypt or something suitable for hashing passwords? > hash_value() The hash part seems a bit redundant, isn't there a standard name to return the value from such an object? -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/. ------=_Part_19_942100050.1408890986868 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Sunday, August 24, 2014 11:06:02 AM UTC+2, Mark= us Mayer wrote:
-Why not add/de= lete algorithm XXX?
I think these are the most common. But I am open to suggestions.


bcrypt or something suitable for hashi= ng passwords?
 
> hash_value()

The hash part seems a bit redundant, isn't there a standard name t= o return the value from such an object?

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to std-proposa= ls+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<= /a>.
------=_Part_19_942100050.1408890986868-- .