Re: Kernel SCM saga..

Junio C Hamano
2005-04-10T09:40:15Z

>>>>> "DL" == David Lang <dlang@digitalinsight.com> writes:

DL> just wanted to point out that recent news shows that sha1 isn't as
DL> good as it was thought to be (far easier to deliberatly create
DL> collisions then it should be)

I suspect there is no need to do so...

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0504090902170.1267@ppc970.osdl.org>
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: Kernel SCM saga..
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 09:16:22 -0700 (PDT)

...

Linus

(*) yeah, yeah, I know about the current theoretical case, and I don't
care. Not only is it theoretical, the way my objects are packed you'd have
to not just generate the same SHA1 for it, it would have to _also_ still
be a valid zlib object _and_ get the header to match the "type + length"
of object part. IOW, the object validity checks are actually even stricter
than just "sha1 matches".