BLAKE3 vs SHA-256
Cryptography keeps you protected when you use your phone and surf the internet. It's done through security algorithms. Have you ever heard of SHA-256? It's a secure hashing algorithm which helps us verify internet data. But it's not the only option. Over time, different algorithms have been developed that offer different levels of security. The potential problem though, with older algorithms, is that as computing power advances, some can be cracked more easily. Therefore, it's crucial to use secure algorithms. A noteworthy one is Blake3, a cryptographic hash function that's faster than the older MD5. Keep in mind, when we talk of cryptographic hashing algorithms, there are key considerations, primarily the level of security. In other words: how crackable is the algorithm? How much computing power does it demand? And how does it fare against other prevalent algorithms? These are the questions we focus on. Another point of observation is the rate of collisions. Assume you are storing data like a password in a system. Typically, we don't store the raw text of the password. Instead, it's cryptographically encrypted, which acts like a signature and precludes anyone else from misusing it. The password is only known to you. Collision cases can occur when two different passwords produce the same output from a cryptographic function, a situation which we want to avoid at all costs. There's a recent misconception linking cryptography and cryptocurrency. They're not quite the same thing; cryptographic hash functions are used to safeguard identities and system access. They also underpin cryptocurrencies. Blake3 purports to be as strong or stronger than SHA-256, while being vastly faster, which makes it quite interesting. Blake3 is based on cryptography that is considered strong unlike SHA-256's predecessor, SHA-1. The National Security Agency (NSA) has flagged a lack of confidence in using SHA-256, in fact, they've prohibited its use in new designs for the U.S. Government. From the evidence, we observe that the Blake3 hash function, compared to SHA-256, is faster, secure, and has advanced inbuilt security features. For instance, it can protect against length extension attacks and offer key personalization. Apart from heightened security, it is speedier than SHA-256, sometimes even when your CPU has built-in acceleration circuits. The reason? Its multi-threaded capability allows Blake3 to execute operations more efficiently. In conclusion, let's dabble a bit in Blake3 via the Rust programming language, it's worth a test drive. From our brief exploration, it appears more powerful and efficient than several other known hash functions. The core point is: Blake3 displays great promise as a reliable cryptographic hash function offering a stronger alternative to SHA-256. Here are the link references used in the video: Blake3 blog post: https://peergos.org/posts/blake3 Rust crate: https://crates.io/crates/blake3 and NSA PDF: https://media.defense.gov/2022/Sep/07...
