Contents
Is SHA512 overkill?
(The 512-bit output size of SHA-512 is utter overkill anyway. SHA-256 is good enough.) As far as I am aware prehashing the user input with a cryptographic hash function and then hash the result with a password hash function is accepted.
Is SHA512 cryptographically secure?
SHA-512 is still a very secure, and trust worthy algorithm that can be safety used in programs currently in development.
Is SHA256 overkill?
Yes, SHA256 checksums are absurdly long and yes, they are absurd overkill for this purpose. SHA1 checksums are easier to compare and by any practical standard in the real world will guard against viruses in installation files.
Which is more secure, bcrypt or SHA-512?
It should suffice to say whether bcrypt or SHA-512 (in the context of an appropriate algorithm like PBKDF2) is good enough. And the answer is yes, either algorithm is secure enough that a breach will occur through an implementation flaw, not cryptanalysis.
Which is a better hashing algorithm SHA256 or SHA512?
SHA512 will be available on your system, or if not, you probably have such an old system that choice of hashing algorithm is the least of your problems. One reason commonly given for preferring bcrypt is that bcrypt is tuneable – you can increase the number of rounds (work factor) to increase the time it takes to crack bcrypt hashes.
Can you use bcrypt in place of a hash algorithm?
Since it can be used in place of a hash algorithm to protect passwords, bcrypt is confusingly referred to as a “hash” algorithm itself. Assuming that rainbow tables have been thwarted by proper use of salt, any truly irreversible function reduces the attacker to trial-and-error.
What’s the difference between SHA512 and Blowfish encryption?
It’s an encryption algorithm. What that means is that you can encrypt something using blowfish, and then later on you can decrypt it back to plain text. SHA512 is a hashing algorithm. That means that (in theory) once you hash the input you can’t get the original input back again.