Talk:Cryptographic primitive

Cryptography: Computer science Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cryptography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cryptography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CryptographyWikipedia:WikiProject CryptographyTemplate:WikiProject CryptographyCryptography articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computer science (assessed as High-importance).

new article; please comment

If you have any questions, major edits, etc. please add a comment here in the Talk page. Thx. Msoos 12:52, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

part of a collection of related articles

I think this article is well seen as part of a suite, all dealing with various issues of crypto systems; design, vunerability, composition, use, ... These might be calles system meta design issues, perhaps.

Existing, and unsatisfactory beginnings, include key management, crypto system, protocol, etc. Should there be a note to this effect, perhaps at the WikiProject: Cryptography page? ww 16:52, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SHA-1

The section "Combining Cryptographic Primitive" mentions SHA-1, but since SHA-1 was broken [and has been deprecated in cryptography for a while anyway], should it be replaced with something secure, such as SHA-256? Hppavilion1 (talk) 23:00, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should, yes I am axx (talk) 14:40, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bold 156.202.34.84 (talk) 12:37, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OpenSSL news example

The Combining cryptographic primitives section ends with "An illustrative example, for a real system, can be seen on the OpenSSL vulnerability news page at [1]": an illustrative example of what, exactly? Also, that page essentially says to go look at the https://www.openssl.org/news/newslog.html page for info or https://www.openssl.org/news/vulnerabilities.html for vulnerabilities, so we should at least update the link, if not remove the section. I will update the link, at least. I am axx (talk) 14:40, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rated article

I'm rating the article as Stub-class (since there are hardly any citations, making for a complete lack of verifiability!) and High-importance (since cryptographic primitives are one of the most fundamental concepts in cryptography). Please review; thanks. Duckmather (talk) 22:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]