>I admit I don't know why this might be significantly better than
>d1+d2, I was hoping someone here would.
>
>
I think there are a couple things going on here. First, since + is
concatenation, SHA-1(SHA-1(data)+data+MD5(data)) provides an input to
the hash that is three times as long as before. I'm also not familiar
with the inner workings on SHA-1 and MD-5, but the second idea here is
that they both represent (somewhat) orthogonal solution spaces, so that
the concatenation of both of them adds more dimensionality and therefore
more uniqueness.
However, I am just guessing here off the top of my head.
>I admit I don't know why this might be significantly better than
>d1+d2, I was hoping someone here would.
>
>
I think there are a couple things going on here. First, since + is
concatenation, SHA-1(SHA-1(data)+data+MD5(data)) provides an input to
the hash that is three times as long as before. I'm also not familiar
with the inner workings on SHA-1 and MD-5, but the second idea here is
that they both represent (somewhat) orthogonal solution spaces, so that
the concatenation of both of them adds more dimensionality and therefore
more uniqueness.
However, I am just guessing here off the top of my head.
Thanks,
Elliott C. Bäck
607-229-0623
http://elliottback.com
[ reply ]