BugTraq
SHA-1 broken Feb 16 2005 12:56PM
Gadi Evron (gadi tehila gov il) (5 replies)
Re: SHA-1 broken Feb 17 2005 02:44PM
Jonathan G. Lampe (jonathan lampe standardnetworks com)
Re: SHA-1 broken Feb 17 2005 01:28AM
Steve Friedl (steve unixwiz net)
Re: SHA-1 broken Feb 17 2005 01:25AM
Robert Sussland (robert inkwood org) (1 replies)
Re: SHA-1 broken Feb 17 2005 10:42PM
dullien gmx de (2 replies)
Hey all,

> We abandon the requirement of collision resistance. This is a strange
> requirement, and is not supported by experience. Collision resistance

we might think of changing the requirement of collision resistance
to "collision resistance in input data that is valid ASCII text". The
attacks on MD5 used the weak avalanche of the highest-order bit
in 32-bit words for producing the collision, basically precluding the
possibility of generating colliding ASCII text.

Cheers,
Thomas Dullien

[ reply ]
Re: SHA-1 broken Feb 19 2005 05:24PM
Darren Reed (avalon caligula anu edu au) (1 replies)
Re: SHA-1 broken Feb 19 2005 05:41PM
dullien gmx de
Re: SHA-1 broken Feb 19 2005 01:22PM
Tollef Fog Heen (tfheen err no) (1 replies)
Re: SHA-1 broken Feb 20 2005 09:45AM
Denis Jedig (seclists syneticon de)
Re: SHA-1 broken Feb 17 2005 01:02AM
Michael Cordover (michael cordover gmail com) (3 replies)
Re: SHA-1 broken Feb 18 2005 02:22AM
Dan Harkless (bugtraq harkless org)
Re: SHA-1 broken Feb 17 2005 11:32PM
D.J. Capelis (djcapelisp yahoo com) (1 replies)
Re: SHA-1 broken Feb 19 2005 03:37AM
Michael Cordover (michael cordover gmail com)
Re: SHA-1 broken Feb 17 2005 10:39PM
dullien gmx de
Re: SHA-1 broken Feb 16 2005 11:27PM
Kent Borg (kentborg borg org)


 

Privacy Statement
Copyright 2010, SecurityFocus