I tend to use sha256sum to check file integrity and then as far into gpg
(see: https://www.gnupg.org/ ) as is practical in the situation.
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Robert Moskowitz
wrote:
>
> On 08/28/2014 04:47 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 15:29:58 -0400,
>>
On 08/28/2014 04:47 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 15:29:58 -0400,
Robert Moskowitz wrote:
Today you might STILL use sha1; it has had tremendous resiliency.
NIST was expecting it to fall as badly as md5 by this point. Most
use at least sha256, and sha3 is now out ther
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 15:29:58 -0400,
Robert Moskowitz wrote:
Today you might STILL use sha1; it has had tremendous resiliency. NIST
was expecting it to fall as badly as md5 by this point. Most use at
least sha256, and sha3 is now out there. Choose your poison.
sha3 isn't really ready
Note my day job IS data communications and security. I am NOT a
cryptographer. I am in a different select group that often refer to
ourselves as the crypto-plumbers. We know how to carefully use the
crypto blocks to build whole systems.
On 08/28/2014 11:34 AM, dustin kempter wrote:
hi all,
On 28.08.2014, dustin kempter wrote:
> hi all, I just had a question. so I have been hearing that md5 has been
> compromised, how much of a security threat does this impose?
MD5 is not used for encryption. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MD5
for further details and for what md5 actually is.
