Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: MD5 algorithm considered toxic (and harmful)
From: coderman <coderman () gmail com>
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 15:09:32 -0800
On Dec 1, 2007 5:06 AM, Kristian Erik Hermansen <kristian.hermansen () gmail com> wrote:
[MD5 is dead like WEP]
yup.
And since Chinese researchers have been attacking SHA-1 lately, should SHA-256 be considered the proper replacement?
SHA2 is good. (so 256 or 512). the design differs from SHA1 and avoids the weaknesses being exploited against this hash func. still, ~2^69 collision resistance for SHA1 is a world of security better than MD5. iMD5 is really dead, lingering only to feast on the brains of the unawares... _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Current thread:
- MD5 algorithm considered toxic (and harmful) Kristian Erik Hermansen (Dec 01)
- Re: MD5 algorithm considered toxic (and harmful) Steven Adair (Dec 01)
- Re: MD5 algorithm considered toxic (and harmful) James Matthews (Dec 01)
- Re: MD5 algorithm considered toxic (and harmful) Enno Rey (Dec 01)
- Re: MD5 algorithm considered toxic (and harmful) Tim (Dec 01)
- Re: MD5 algorithm considered toxic (and harmful) Paul Schmehl (Dec 01)
- Re: MD5 algorithm considered toxic (and harmful) James Matthews (Dec 01)
- Re: MD5 algorithm considered toxic (and harmful) Steven Adair (Dec 01)
- Re: MD5 algorithm considered toxic (and harmful) Kristian Erik Hermansen (Dec 01)