From 58b77d00dfa7c28b46400d6e5976e265d8458a55 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: liam Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 16:04:11 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Added a comment: Why is the default HMACSHA1 for shared encryption? --- ..._7aa7dfcf927ca26cc51d0c2148674e53._comment | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/encryption/comment_18_7aa7dfcf927ca26cc51d0c2148674e53._comment diff --git a/doc/encryption/comment_18_7aa7dfcf927ca26cc51d0c2148674e53._comment b/doc/encryption/comment_18_7aa7dfcf927ca26cc51d0c2148674e53._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..7e7c8f96e4 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/encryption/comment_18_7aa7dfcf927ca26cc51d0c2148674e53._comment @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="liam" + avatar="http://cdn.libravatar.org/avatar/5cb416d010c1d3f0ca677dd7f6c822ea" + subject="Why is the default HMACSHA1 for shared encryption?" + date="2025-05-14T16:04:11Z" + content=""" +I see that the shared encryption seems to use HMACSHA1 as the default. +The https://git-annex.branchable.com/backends/ page indicates that SHA256E is the default backend used for the unencrypted key value store. + +Is there a reason why the default for shared encryption is not HMACSHA256 to match the default used by unencrypted repos? + +Does using HMACSHA1 present any caveats? +I imagine something like collisions more likely with the older hashing algorithm. +However, I don't know enough about how it works to make a good judgement on that. + +Any insight is appreciated. + +Thanks +"""]] -- 2.30.2