RE: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday

From: Rager, Anton (Anton) (arager_at_avaya.com)
Date: 12/08/04

  • Next message: Joel Maslak: "Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday"
    Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 10:06:19 -0700
    To: "Gandalf The White" <gandalf@digital.net>, "Dan Kaminsky" <dan@doxpara.com>, "BugTraq" <bugtraq@securityfocus.com>
    
    

    Some things to note....

    1 - Wang and Joux's attacks do not allow determination of original
    inputs from a given hash.
    2 - The interesting and newsworthy part of Wang's paper is not that
    there are collisions in MD5 (and the other hash algs they produced
    collisions for), but that they can produce colliding inputs by some
    process other than random or bruteforce searching. They have some
    method that allows them to produce colliding inputs at will with a
    minimal amount of work - 32way 1.7ghz system produces unique 128byte
    colliding texts in under 1.5hrs. They have proven this is more than just
    random/bruteforce luck by providing two pairs of colliding inputs with
    wrong initial values for MD5, and in the same day (at Crypto2004)
    produced 2 new pairs of colliding inputs for the corrected MD5 init
    values.

    To truly understand the impacts of Wang's attacks, the actual collision
    prediction/search method needs to be published. From the information
    released so far, Wang is relying on very particular 128byte sequences
    with bits flipped in 6 or 7 bit positions between the two 128 byte
    sequences. It does not appear that a colliding input can be produced for
    just any arbitrary input/text with this attack -- it appears the
    original input needs to meet some very specific requirements to allow
    creation of a colliding (alternate) input that will produce the same
    output hash. More detail on Wang's alg/method is needed to know the full
    extent of the applied impacts.
     
    Regards,

    Anton Rager
    arager@avaya.com

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Gandalf The White [mailto:gandalf@digital.net]
    Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 3:55 PM
    To: Dan Kaminsky; BugTraq
    Subject: Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday

    Greetings and Salutations:

    On 12/6/04 5:29 PM, "Dan Kaminsky" <dan@doxpara.com> wrote:
    <snip>
    > Some highlights from the paper:
    > * The attack itself is pretty limited -- essentially, we can create
    > "doppelganger" blocks (my term) anywhere inside a file that may be
    > swapped out, one for another, without altering the final MD5 hash.
    This
    > lets us create any number of binary-inequal files with the same
    md5sum.

    From my reading it appears that you need the original source to create
    the
    doppelganger blocks. It also appears that given a MD5 hash you could
    not
    create a input that would give that MD5 back. Passwords encoded with
    MD5
    would not fall prey to your discovery. Is this correct?

    Unfortunately when "The Press" publicized the MD5 hash discovery by Joux
    and
    Wang it almost sounded like "The Press" was surprised to find collisions
    in
    the MD5 domain (intuitive to me, a limited number of outputs and a
    infinite
    number of inputs = Collisions). I assume that a "good" hash would have
    a
    even distribution of collisions across the domain and that the larger
    number
    of bits for the output the better the hash (assuming no cryptographic
    algorithm errors).

    Thanks,
    Ken

    ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards for they are subtle and
    quick to anger.
    Ken Hollis - Gandalf The White - gandalf@digital.net - O- TINLC
    WWW Page - http://digital.net/~gandalf/
    Trace E-Mail forgery - http://digital.net/~gandalf/spamfaq.html
    Trolls crossposts - http://digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html


  • Next message: Joel Maslak: "Re: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: When will md5crk complete?
      ... and in that case birthday attack ... > His core message is correct however: you shouldn't be using MD5. ... Collisions DO exist for every hash algorithm... ...
      (sci.crypt)
    • Re: MD5 Myths
      ... That's an over-broad indictment of MD5. ... ways to deliberately create collisions; ... found ways to create source strings that will hash to a ... in the MD5 digest to do more and/ or redesign ...
      (sci.crypt)
    • Re: Complex Theoretical One Way Hash Question
      ... JPEG) in the image such that the MD5 is human readable in the image AND ... is an MD5 of the modified image including the readable MD5. ... You can't do this without breaking the hash. ... possible collisions. ...
      (sci.crypt)
    • Re: Rand generator (MD5)
      ... My micro cannot handle anything more than 32 bits! ... YOu do not have MD5. ... It does not sound to me like your hash implimentation is very ... void byteReverse(unsigned char *buf, unsigned longs); ...
      (sci.crypt)
    • Re: Rand generator (MD5)
      ... My micro cannot handle anything more than 32 bits! ... YOu do not have MD5. ... It does not sound to me like your hash implimentation is very ... void byteReverse(unsigned char *buf, unsigned longs); ...
      (sci.crypt)