Hacker News Reader

>It is not general purpose crypto strength

This made me curious. Is it because at this stage it is a proposal that has not yet been verified/analysed or are there actual reasons that you know of that make this not "general purpose strong"?

View on HN

I don't actually have proof that it isn't crypto strength. But comparing it to other algorithms that have been broken, it seems unlikely that it would hold given the rather modest amount of computation done.

I do believe that it meets the requirements for being a MAC function, and I'm completely certain that it is a great non-cryptographic hash function.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com