Talk:RIPEMD

splitting the article

This article is focused on RIPEMD-160, so it's name should be changed to RIPEMD-160 and it should be epurated from general info. In RIPEMD should be placed a list of all RIPEMD's with more general information and links to all possible RIPEMD's pages (-128, -256, ...). --82.59.7.7 07:06, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

The other approach is to make this page more explicitly about the "RIPEMD family" (this is what we do in the article on SHA family, which covers all of SHA-0, SHA-1 and SHA-2. I would favour this approach, because otherwise you end up with half a dozen tiny articles on a similar topic. — Matt Crypto 11:39, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

I vote for that too, tho I don t possess the knowledge to do so. Altho I suppose I COULD just generalise the page...79.64.101.157 (talk) 09:45, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

"In August 2004, a collision was reported for the original RIPEMD"

One should mention that there are reported collisiosn for RIPEMD, but the RIPEMD160 is secure nonetheless! 83.135.199.130 16:00, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

SPAM?

I don't see how this isn't spam: "# Hash'em all! — free online text and file hashing with different algorithms (including RIPEMD)"

The site owner probably linked to it so he could get donations — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.115.100 (talk) 23:30, 23 February 2009‎ (UTC)

The material in question was removed long, long ago. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 16:15, 16 October 2014 (UTC)