JDK-8000415 : Add support for SHA-3
  • Type: Enhancement
  • Component: security-libs
  • Sub-Component: java.security
  • Affected Version: 7,8
  • Priority: P2
  • Status: Resolved
  • Resolution: Fixed
  • OS: generic
  • CPU: generic
  • Submitted: 2012-10-04
  • Updated: 2023-12-12
  • Resolved: 2016-05-14
The Version table provides details related to the release that this issue/RFE will be addressed.

Unresolved : Release in which this issue/RFE will be addressed.
Resolved: Release in which this issue/RFE has been resolved.
Fixed : Release in which this issue/RFE has been fixed. The release containing this fix may be available for download as an Early Access Release or a General Availability Release.

To download the current JDK release, click here.
JDK 9
9 b119Fixed
Related Reports
Duplicate :  
JDK-7169833 - Need to determine native mech value at runtime
Duplicate :  
JDK-8062219 - Remove libsoftcrypto.h under jdk.crypto.ucrypto once devkit is upgraded
Relates :  
JDK-8172366 - Support SHA-3 based signatures
Relates :  
JDK-8064399 - JEP 287: SHA-3 Hash Algorithms
Relates :  
JDK-8004078 - [docs] Create Standard Names for SHA-3 algorithms.
Relates :  
JDK-8309904 - Use Solaris Ucrypto Free context method in JDK8u for crypto operation
Description
The SHA-3 winner was announced yesterday:

    http://www.nist.gov/itl/csd/sha-100212.cfm
Comments
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/9db62c197dcd User: lana Date: 2016-05-18 20:42:24 +0000
18-05-2016
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/9db62c197dcd User: valeriep Date: 2016-05-14 04:22:29 +0000
14-05-2016
This should be the bugid that is used for the SHA-3 JEP changeset (See JDK-8064399).
03-02-2016
Agreed.
03-09-2014
I agree with Sean. In hindsight, SHA224with* probably should have been SHA2-224with*, but like the rest of the industry the SHA version was ignored. SHA3224with isn't easy to read and will probably lead to confusion in the future. I think SHA3-224with* is a better format.
03-09-2014
We have SHA224with* currently.
26-08-2014
That reads too much like 3,224 to me. Maybe SHA3-224with* ?
26-08-2014
FIPS 202 is in draft until the end of the month. http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/drafts/fips-202/fips_202_draft.pdf They are calling the algorithm names: SHA3-224 SHA3-256 SHA3-384 SHA3-512 SHAKE128 SHAKE256 I suggest we follow suit. We should probably have Signature names have a similar nomenclature: SHA3224with* SHA3256with* SHA3384with* SHA3512with*
26-08-2014
More info at: http://keccak.noekeon.org/
04-10-2012