BLAKE1 and BLAKE2 are both cryptographic hash functions, with BLAKE2 being an improved version of BLAKE1. Here's a comparison highlighting their key differences:

Design and Evolution

• BLAKE1: Was a finalist in the NIST SHA-3 competition, known for its high performance and security. Its design was influenced by the ChaCha stream cipher and shares structural similarities with SHA-2, but with notable optimizations.
• BLAKE2: Introduced as an improved version of BLAKE1, BLAKE2 aimed to address some of the shortcomings and performance issues of its predecessor. It comes in two main variants: BLAKE2s, optimized for 8- to 32-bit platforms, and BLAKE2b, optimized for 64-bit platforms.

Performance

• BLAKE1: Offers high performance, often outperforming SHA-2 in software implementations. However, it was still seen as potentially improvable, especially in terms of speed and resource efficiency.
• BLAKE2: Provides significant performance improvements over BLAKE1, making it one of the fastest cryptographic hash functions in real-world applications. BLAKE2 is often faster than MD5, a non-cryptographically secure hash function, while providing a high level of security.

Security

• Both BLAKE1 and BLAKE2 are designed to be highly secure, with no significant vulnerabilities identified in either as of the last update. BLAKE2 maintains or improves the security properties of BLAKE1, offering resistance to common cryptographic attacks such as collision and preimage attacks.

Features and Flexibility

• BLAKE1: While secure and fast, it did not include additional features beyond its basic hashing capability.
• BLAKE2: Offers several additional features compared to BLAKE1, including:
  • Simplified Configuration: BLAKE2 provides a simpler setup process compared to BLAKE1, requiring fewer parameters for basic usage.
  • Built-in Support for Keyed Hashing (MAC): BLAKE2 can be directly used as a keyed hash function without needing HMAC construction, which is beneficial for authenticated encryption, password hashing, and more.
  • Personalization and Salt: BLAKE2 allows for personalization and salting, enabling users to customize the hash function for specific applications and enhance security against certain types of attacks.

Use Cases

• BLAKE1: While still a robust and secure hash function, BLAKE1 is less commonly recommended for new projects due to the availability of BLAKE2, which offers enhanced features and performance.
• BLAKE2: Given its high performance and additional features, BLAKE2 is well-suited for a wide range of applications, including cryptographic protocols, digital signatures, checksums, and more. Its flexibility and efficiency make it a preferred choice in scenarios where speed and security are paramount.

Conclusion

BLAKE2 is generally recommended over BLAKE1 for new projects due to its improved performance, enhanced security features, and greater flexibility. It is suitable for a wide range of applications and can provide significant advantages in terms of both efficiency and cryptographic robustness.