From: Berzerk <berzerk@xmission.xmission.com>
To: N/A
Message Hash: dfca0223acfb57d624620cb9edd1276a57460dca6d66b2d6ea555067fe00408f
Message ID: <Pine.3.89.9407171723.A29855-0100000@xmission>
Reply To: <aa4f36980002101ef083@[129.219.97.131]>
UTC Datetime: 1994-07-17 23:33:51 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 17 Jul 94 16:33:51 PDT
From: Berzerk <berzerk@xmission.xmission.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 94 16:33:51 PDT
Subject: Hashed hash
In-Reply-To: <aa4f36980002101ef083@[129.219.97.131]>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9407171723.A29855-0100000@xmission>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
OK, I have been doing a few numerical experiments on hash functions to
see if all this stuff I have been saying is true. I took the folowing
function, as my n bit to n bit hash function.
first n bits(md5(n bits))
and iterated it to see how many colisions there were. I found that the
total entropy in the result typically decresed by 50% for n=8,10,12,14
and droped like a rock when you itterated these.
I have a couple of questions,
1) is this a good hash function, or am I missing something here.
2) the expected collision rate for rand functions is much lower. I am at
a loss to explain md5.
I will be trying smaller versions of all of the suggestions here to see
if they help or hurt, and will set them up to run on the spare cycles on
a machene or two around here.
Any comments on my stratigy are appreciated in advance of me running the
calculatios.
Roger.
Return to July 1994
Return to “Berzerk <berzerk@xmission.xmission.com>”