From b02631b14b2a155c4a233c8e8dad2569c159e85d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Zooko Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2016 20:06:36 +0000 Subject: doc: recommend b2sum as well as SHA2 b2sum is faster, easier to use safely, and more future-proof --- doc/coreutils.texi | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'doc') diff --git a/doc/coreutils.texi b/doc/coreutils.texi index a507280bd..201964456 100644 --- a/doc/coreutils.texi +++ b/doc/coreutils.texi @@ -3819,8 +3819,9 @@ are vanishingly small. However, it should not be considered secure against malicious tampering: although finding a file with a given MD5 fingerprint is considered infeasible at the moment, it is known how to modify certain files, including digital certificates, so that they -appear valid when signed with an MD5 digest. -For more secure hashes, consider using SHA-2. @xref{sha2 utilities}. +appear valid when signed with an MD5 digest. For more secure hashes, +consider using SHA-2, or the newer @command{b2sum} command. +@xref{sha2 utilities}. @xref{b2sum invocation}. If a @var{file} is specified as @samp{-} or if no files are given @command{md5sum} computes the checksum for the standard input. -- cgit v1.2.3-70-g09d2