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. &mdash; 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. —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 16:15, 16 October 2014 (UTC)