webmas...@felipe1982.com wrote:
> i don't think this is correct. See:
> http://th.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/People/lucks/HashCollisions/
It depends on what sort of threat you're facing. In this case, the MD5
attack is predicated on the victim signing documents they did not
originate. This is of
> As of this writing, no algorithm supported by GnuPG has been
> compromised. Even MD5 is still on its feet.
i don't think this is correct. See:
http://th.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/People/lucks/HashCollisions/
felipe
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gn
Dear Robert
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 6:42 AM, Subu wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 6:15 AM, Robert J. Hansen - r...@sixdemonbag.org
> <+gpg2+maniams+ba4eefb302.rjh#sixdemonbag@spamgourmet.com> wrote:
>
>> gpg2.20.mani...@dfgh.net wrote:
>> > What are the algos that are compromised ? or N
gpg2.20.mani...@dfgh.net wrote:
> What are the algos that are compromised ? or NOT to be used ? If this is
> too long a list
Sorry to be so late to the party --
As of this writing, no algorithm supported by GnuPG has been
compromised. Even MD5 is still on its feet.
That said, the SHA-1 and MD5
