Re: Performance: MD4 vs MD5

Daniel Berlin wrote:
> On Friday, April 25, 2003, at 04:19 PM, Michael wrote:
>>> Where did you read that collisions with MD4 are that frequent?
>>> I'm aware of cryptographic attacks against the first few rounds
>>> but do not recall reading _anything_ that states MD4's collision
>>> rate is that high.
>
> "Dobbertin has shown how collisions for the full version of MD4 can be
> found in under a minute on a typical PC. Clearly, MD4 should now be
> considered broken."

I agree. It is broken for cryptographic purposes. However, this discussion
doesn't relate to cryptography in the slightest. We simply need a hash function
and it our case a collision isn't really that bad.

> If you want collision rates, see http://www.cs.duke.edu/~anderson/hashing/

Seen it. What's your point?

> If you do a google search on "md4 collision rate", you'll see things
> like "(S/Key was originally just MD4, which proved to have a high
> collision rate)"

I know its broken for cryptographic purposes. This discussion doesn't relate to
cryptography.

> Also see http://burtleburtle.net/bob/hash/doobs.html

Seen that too. What's your point?

> Note that table shows that a simple dictionary of 38740 english words is
> enough to generate a collision in MD4.

People have won the lottery on their first play. Doesn't mean a d*mn thing.

Michael

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Apr 26 04:45:14 2003