Re: How about MD5(NewHash(DATA))?
From: JiXian Yang (YJX_OnLine_at_126.com)
Date: 10/31/04
- Next message: Anonymous: "Re: WORLD REVOLUTION ! !REVOLUCIÓN MUNDIAL ! WELTREVOLU"
- Previous message: Tom St Denis: "Re: How about MD5(NewHash(DATA))?"
- In reply to: Tom St Denis: "Re: How about MD5(NewHash(DATA))?"
- Next in thread: Tom St Denis: "Re: How about MD5(NewHash(DATA))?"
- Reply: Tom St Denis: "Re: How about MD5(NewHash(DATA))?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: 31 Oct 2004 09:52:34 -0600
Tom St Denis <tomstdenis@iahu.ca> wrote:
>
>Why does this question come up every 6 months.
>
>Why would you think MD5 o MD5 would be stronger than MD5 [supposedly
>against finding collisions, though you could have meant against inversion]
>
>Tom
An MD5 collision can be found in a matter or hours.
In http://www.md5crk.com/, you can find the report.
It shows that finding a collision is not necessary to scan all the MD5
dictionary but to change the special bits when we have known the input.
So we must update MD5.
I wonder if MD5(NewHash(DATA)) is stronger than NewHash(DATA) when
NewHash(DATA) used the same quantity of bits.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
- Next message: Anonymous: "Re: WORLD REVOLUTION ! !REVOLUCIÓN MUNDIAL ! WELTREVOLU"
- Previous message: Tom St Denis: "Re: How about MD5(NewHash(DATA))?"
- In reply to: Tom St Denis: "Re: How about MD5(NewHash(DATA))?"
- Next in thread: Tom St Denis: "Re: How about MD5(NewHash(DATA))?"
- Reply: Tom St Denis: "Re: How about MD5(NewHash(DATA))?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|