Re: hash tags

On Mar 8, 2013, at 4:12 PM, PJ Eby <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Noah Kantrowitz <[email protected]> wrote:
>> MD5 is _not_ acceptable for anything security related and we shouldn't be adding anything that increases our dependence on it. MD5's only use in the packaging world is to make people who forget that TCP has its own checksums feel all warm and fuzzy that there hasn't been _accidental_ download corruption.
> 
> So, you're saying that someone has found a second-preimage attack
> against MD5 that's more efficient than the current 2**127 threshold
> established in 2009?
> 
> "Anything security related" is pretty broad.  Out of the many classes
> of attacks on hashes, AFAIK the only class that's relevant to PyPI is
> second preimage attacks,  i.e. one where the attacker has the original
> file and the hash, and must construct a new file that produces the
> same hash value.
> 
> Did you have some other type of hash attack in mind?  And in either
> case, do you have a referent for the attack complexity?
> _______________________________________________
> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig

Here's some more information pulled straight from Wikiepdia:

However, it has since been shown that MD5 is not collision resistant;[3] as such, MD5 is not suitable for applications like SSL certificates or digital signatures that rely on this property. In 1996, a flaw was found with the design of MD5, and while it was not a clearly fatal weakness, cryptographers began recommending the use of other algorithms, such as SHA-1—which has since been found to be vulnerable as well. In 2004, more serious flaws were discovered in MD5, making further use of the algorithm for security purposes questionable—specifically, a group of researchers described how to create a pair of files that share the same MD5 checksum.[4][5] Further advances were made in breaking MD5 in 2005, 2006, and 2007.[6] In December 2008, a group of researchers used this technique to fake SSL certificate validity,[7][8] and CMU Software Engineering Institute now says that MD5 "should be considered cryptographically broken and unsuitable for further use",[9] and most U.S. government applications now require the SHA-2 family of hash functions.[10]

Here's the important highlights:

    - specifically, a group of researchers described how to create a pair of files that share the same MD5 checksum
    - MD5 "should be considered cryptographically broken and unsuitable for further use"


-----------------
Donald Stufft
PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA

_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin)
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=u70V
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----