|
|
BugTraq
MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday Dec 06 2004 11:29PM Dan Kaminsky (dan doxpara com) (3 replies) Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday Dec 08 2004 01:46AM Joel Maslak (jmaslak antelope net) (2 replies) MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Today Dec 08 2004 01:39AM Pavel Machek (pavel ucw cz) (1 replies) Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Today Dec 08 2004 10:23PM Dan Kaminsky (dan doxpara com) (1 replies) Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday Dec 07 2004 10:54PM Gandalf The White (gandalf digital net) (4 replies) RE: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday Dec 08 2004 04:01AM David Schwartz (davids webmaster com) (2 replies) Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday Dec 08 2004 09:30PM George Georgalis (george galis org) (1 replies) Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday Dec 08 2004 04:36AM Gandalf The White (gandalf digital net) (3 replies) Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday Dec 08 2004 09:44PM Keith Oxenrider (koxenrider sol-biotech com) Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday Dec 08 2004 09:17PM Solar Designer (solar openwall com) (1 replies) Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday Dec 08 2004 10:03PM Dan Kaminsky (dan doxpara com) (2 replies) Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday Dec 09 2004 01:47AM Pavel Kankovsky (peak argo troja mff cuni cz) Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday Dec 08 2004 08:48PM Paul Wouters (paul xtdnet nl) (2 replies) Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday Dec 08 2004 08:52PM Dan Kaminsky (dan doxpara com) (1 replies) Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday Dec 08 2004 01:51AM Joel Maslak (jmaslak antelope net) (1 replies) Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday Dec 08 2004 12:13AM Tim (tim-security sentinelchicken org) (2 replies) Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday Dec 08 2004 06:52PM David F. Skoll (dfs roaringpenguin com) |
|
Privacy Statement |
>> Can't we just truncate the password to 8 characters like in the old days
>> before doing the MD5 hash? It will greatly reduce the chance of a
>> collision.
>> In fact, I am not even sure my systems don't do this already.
>>
> Actually, this greatly increases the chance of a collision. 123456789 will
> collide with 123456780.
I was talking about limiting the input, not the output. I assumed it would
be more difficult to find a collision when there are less degrees of freedom
in the input.
What I realised after my mail though, is that it is probably pretty easy to
prebuild a dictionary of all 8 character combinations and their MD5 sums.
Paul
[ reply ]