You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently supported hash functions (SHA3 and BLAKE3) produce 256-bit outputs. This is an overkill when for proofs which target security levels below 128 bits.
For example, for proofs targeting 100-bit security level, hash output of 200 bits should be sufficient (as we still get 100-bit collision resistance). Using such a hash function should reduce proof sizes by about 20%.
As the first step, we could add just a single hash function - e.g. BLAKE3 with 192-bit output (we could call it Blake3_192 to keep the naming consistent with Blake3_256 that we currently have).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Currently supported hash functions (SHA3 and BLAKE3) produce 256-bit outputs. This is an overkill when for proofs which target security levels below 128 bits.
For example, for proofs targeting 100-bit security level, hash output of 200 bits should be sufficient (as we still get 100-bit collision resistance). Using such a hash function should reduce proof sizes by about 20%.
As the first step, we could add just a single hash function - e.g. BLAKE3 with 192-bit output (we could call it
Blake3_192
to keep the naming consistent withBlake3_256
that we currently have).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: