nanog mailing list archives
Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble
From: Peter Kristolaitis <alter3d () alter3d ca>
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 00:45:21 -0500
On 3/1/2017 10:50 PM, James DeVincentis via NANOG wrote:
Realistically any hash function *will* have collisions when two items are specifically crafted to collide after expending insane amounts of computing power, money, and… i wonder how much in power they burned for this little stunt.
Easy enough to estimate.A dual-socket server with 2 X5675 CPUs (12 cores total) draws about 225W under full load, or about 18.75W per core.
0.01875 kW * 8766 h/y * 6500 y = about 1,070,000 kWhFor the GPU side, an NVIDIA Tesla K80 GPU accelerator draws 300W at full load.
0.3 kW * 8766 h/y * 110 y = about 290,000 kWh. So the total calculation consumed about 1.36M kWh.A quick Google search tells me the US national average industrial rate for electricity is $0.0667/kWh, for a cost of $90,712. That's not counting AC-DC conversion loss, or the power to run the cooling. Or the cost of the hardware, though it's fair to assume that in Google's case they didn't have to buy any new hardware just for this.
Current thread:
- RE: SHA1 collisions proven possisble, (continued)
- RE: SHA1 collisions proven possisble james.d--- via NANOG (Mar 01)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble valdis . kletnieks (Mar 01)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble James DeVincentis via NANOG (Mar 01)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Nick Hilliard (Mar 01)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Matt Palmer (Mar 01)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble James DeVincentis via NANOG (Mar 01)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Royce Williams (Mar 01)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Jimmy Hess (Mar 02)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble valdis . kletnieks (Mar 02)
- RE: SHA1 collisions proven possisble james.d--- via NANOG (Mar 01)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble James DeVincentis via NANOG (Mar 01)
- Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble Peter Kristolaitis (Mar 01)