I think if you could find a real life collision - you might be able to
get some sort of award. Good luck. :-)
Cheers,
mark
On 06/30/2010 05:57 AM, michael.fe...@evonik.com wrote:
Hello,
O.K., it seems there is really a need to discuss the problem of
SHA-1 collisions more deeply.
...
But one is missing!
4. The set of one kind of data and that of another kind are overlapping
very infrequent, if at all. They could be seen as highly discriminable
and separated parts of the sample set of all possible data.
So SHA-1 hashes will wildly spread on the first set, doing the best
of its job, and also, but independently, spread on the other set as
wide as it?s expected to do.
What is the result, when two or more sets of hash values, each widely
spread of the same value range, are used together in one fetch index?
Perhaps, some can see a danger now, too.
I? am working on a practical demonstration, which everybody could
reproduce with his or her spreadsheet program.
But please be patient, I have other things to do, as well.
Greetings,
P.S. Thanks for the warning; we are not going to use 1.7.
At the Moment we are not using 1.6 either,
because of the SHA-1 rep-share cache.
--
Mark Mielke<m...@mielke.cc>
