From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Jackson Subject: Re: SHA1 hash safety Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 12:16:52 -0700 Organization: SGI Message-ID: <20050416121652.1b1a8645.pj@sgi.com> References: <20050416123155.GA19908@elte.hu> <4261132A.3090907@khandalf.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: omb@bluewin.ch, david.lang@digitalinsight.com, mingo@elte.hu, git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Apr 16 21:14:07 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DMsk1-0006hw-K8 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sat, 16 Apr 2005 21:14:05 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262736AbVDPTRq (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Apr 2005 15:17:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262735AbVDPTRq (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Apr 2005 15:17:46 -0400 Received: from zeus1.kernel.org ([204.152.191.4]:2254 "EHLO zeus1.kernel.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262736AbVDPTRo (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Apr 2005 15:17:44 -0400 Received: from omx3.sgi.com (omx3-ext.sgi.com [192.48.171.20]) by zeus1.kernel.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j3GJHfGJ020897 for ; Sat, 16 Apr 2005 12:17:42 -0700 Received: from cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (cthulhu.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.2]) by omx3.sgi.com (8.12.11/8.12.9/linux-outbound_gateway-1.1) with ESMTP id j3GJeRcD009584; Sat, 16 Apr 2005 12:40:28 -0700 Received: from vpn2 (mtv-vpn-hw-pj-2.corp.sgi.com [134.15.25.219]) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (SGI-8.12.5/8.12.5) with SMTP id j3GJGvlU15194708; Sat, 16 Apr 2005 12:16:57 -0700 (PDT) To: "C. Scott Ananian" In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.0 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Scott wrote: > Please, let's talk about hash collisions responsibly. Agreed. Chasing down links from the one Petr provided: http://cryptography.hyperlink.cz/MD5_collisions.html the best read I found was: MD5 To Be Considered Harmful Someday http://eprint.iacr.org/2004/357.pdf As the author, Dan Kaminsky, states: > it is far too easy to overestimate the risks described in this paper. This paper does a good job of explaining the vulnerabilities that MD5 has, currently (and yes, git uses SHA1 ...). We have far greater vulnerabilities from intentional or accidental coding errors, inadequately audited code, root exploits of user (non-kernel) code, compilation and build tools, unreliable hardware (how many of us use non-ECC memory - I do), poorly administered systems, ... -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.650.933.1373, 1.925.600.0401