nanog mailing list archives
Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble
From: valdis.kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 19:48:52 -0500
On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 19:28:44 -0500, Jon Lewis said:
Doing it with an ASCII document, source code, or even something like a Word document (containing only text and formatting), and having it not be obvious upon inspection of the documents that the "imposter" document contains some "specific hash influencing 'gibberish'" would be far more disturbing.
Keep in mind that there's *lots* of stuff that people might want to sign that aren't flat ASCII. For instance, the video that just came out of that police officer's bodycam. If the "gibberish" is scattered across the pixels, you'll never know. And let's face it - if you need to do an inspection because you don't trust the hash to have done its job - *the hash has failed to do its job*.
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble, (continued)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Patrick W. Gilmore (Feb 23)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble valdis . kletnieks (Feb 23)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Ricky Beam (Feb 23)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble J. Hellenthal (Feb 23)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Royce Williams (Feb 23)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Richard Hesse (Feb 25)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble valdis . kletnieks (Feb 25)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Randy Bush (Feb 26)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Patrick W. Gilmore (Feb 23)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble valdis . kletnieks (Feb 23)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Jon Lewis (Feb 23)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble valdis . kletnieks (Feb 23)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Vincent Bernat (Feb 24)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Patrick W. Gilmore (Feb 23)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble valdis . kletnieks (Feb 23)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Patrick W. Gilmore (Feb 23)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Vincent Bernat (Feb 24)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Patrick W. Gilmore (Feb 24)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Ricky Beam (Feb 23)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble valdis . kletnieks (Feb 23)
- RE: SHA1 collisions proven possisble David Edelman (Feb 23)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Lyndon Nerenberg (Feb 23)