What are advantages of using a HMAC over RSA with SHA-1 hashes?

Question

I am currently studying for an exam and this was a previous question:

Give one advantage of using HMACs over using RSA to sign SHA-1 hashes.

My thoughts are that it has something to do with the fact that HMAC assumes a private key has already been shared so there is no need to use public-private keys. But wouldn't it be possible for this key to be compromised?

Advantages of HMAC are speed, as stated in the fine answers; and small size of the authenticating token (128 bits or even much less, vs at least 1024 bits). The obvious drawback of HMAC is that one needs a secret to verify that token. — fgrieu, Apr 03 '13 at 06:45

score 9 · Accepted Answer · edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:48

9

HMAC is much faster to compute. Also, HMAC might still be secure, even if the underlying hash function is broken. This is not true for RSA + a broken hash function.

edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:48

Community

1

answered Apr 13 '12 at 16:02

mikeazo

38,563
8
112
180

"Will probably be must"? What about "are much"? Smaller size is certainly true as well. This is a dumb question though, it all depends on the key management... – Maarten Bodewes Apr 14 '12 at 16:08
@owlstead HMAC is much faster - RSA is a very slow algorithm – Owen Orwell Apr 02 '13 at 18:11
@OwenOrwell Sorry for the misunderstanding, that was about a typo in the answer, I'll edit it. – Maarten Bodewes Apr 02 '13 at 23:40

score 3 · Answer 2 · answered Apr 13 '12 at 18:58

The main advantage is speed: HMACs are much faster than an RSA signature.

Given the question says you are signing SHA-1 hashes, there is no need to use a hash function in composition with RSA since the message will already be short-enough to sign directly. I doubt they are looking for an answer about the security of the underlying hash.

What are advantages of using a HMAC over RSA with SHA-1 hashes?

2 Answers2