# Claims of breaking 92% of SHA-256 can't be good news for Julia!
**URL:** https://discourse.julialang.org/t/claims-of-breaking-92-of-sha-256-cant-be-good-news-for-julia/136714
**Category:** Offtopic
**Created:** [April 14, 2026, 6:46pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/claims-of-breaking-92-of-sha-256-cant-be-good-news-for-julia/136714 "2026-04-14T18:46:59Z")
**Posts on this page:** 7
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@PetrKryslUCSD](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/PetrKryslUCSD)
#### Post date: [April 14, 2026, 6:46pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/claims-of-breaking-92-of-sha-256-cant-be-good-news-for-julia/136714/1 "2026-04-14T18:46:59Z")
> **[We broke 92% of SHA-256](https://stateofutopia.com/papers/2/we-broke-92-percent-of-sha-256.html)**
Make that 100% - that would break everything, wouldn’t it?
---
### Author:  [@DoktorMike](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/DoktorMike)
#### Post date: [April 14, 2026, 6:53pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/claims-of-breaking-92-of-sha-256-cant-be-good-news-for-julia/136714/2 "2026-04-14T18:53:18Z")
I don’t know much about cryptography but if the statement they make is true I would say alot of software has a lot of problems. 🤔
---
### Author:  [@adienes](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/adienes)
#### Post date: [April 14, 2026, 6:55pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/claims-of-breaking-92-of-sha-256-cant-be-good-news-for-julia/136714/3 "2026-04-14T18:55:17Z")
this “paper” is AI slop and should not be taken seriously.
---
### Author:  [@technocrat](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/technocrat)
#### Post date: [April 14, 2026, 7:14pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/claims-of-breaking-92-of-sha-256-cant-be-good-news-for-julia/136714/4 "2026-04-14T19:14:38Z")
Well, the technical terms seem to be in the ballpark even if the tone is unjustifiably alarmist. What’s most telling is that he doesn’t have a seat at the adult’s table at IACR ePrint.
---
### Author:  [@kapple](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/kapple)
#### Post date: [April 14, 2026, 11:06pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/claims-of-breaking-92-of-sha-256-cant-be-good-news-for-julia/136714/5 "2026-04-14T23:06:11Z")
Was it made by a [Research paper mill](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_paper_mill)?
Relevant YouTube video: [https://youtu.be/SEwiOykoXXc](https://youtu.be/SEwiOykoXXc)
---
### Author:  [@GunnarFarneback](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/GunnarFarneback)
#### Post date: [April 15, 2026, 7:54am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/claims-of-breaking-92-of-sha-256-cant-be-good-news-for-julia/136714/6 "2026-04-15T07:54:44Z")
Disregarding the credibility of the source, which I’m not going to honor with a click.
> [@PetrKryslUCSD](#):
>
> Make that 100% - that would break everything, wouldn’t it?
No, it would have zero impact on Julia specifically, other than removing one potential upgrade path from the increasingly vulnerable SHA-1.
If we now instead assume that SHA-1 becomes broken to the degree that anyone with moderate resources can engineer a hash collision, it still wouldn’t break everything. For normal benign use nothing would change. But it does mean that a layer of defense against bad actors would be lost.
---
### Author:  [@lilachint](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/lilachint)
#### Post date: [April 16, 2026, 12:11pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/claims-of-breaking-92-of-sha-256-cant-be-good-news-for-julia/136714/7 "2026-04-16T12:11:50Z")
Is SHA1 still used for security related purposes? I thought tools that use SHA1 like Git is only using it for corruption check (which I have no idea why a part of the Git community is advocating for a switch to SHA256). That being said, I hate AI slop, and SHA1 or SHA256 being actually broken would not only be a problem for Julia lol.