1996-07-01 - Re: rsync and md4

Header Data

From: mpd@netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 246692848cb91f56bf8d701c938dc38067c01ab8d9d0b9d06ddc30266de33781
Message ID: <199606301849.LAA23313@netcom18.netcom.com>
Reply To: <199606301747.NAA18634@jekyll.piermont.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-07-01 07:47:04 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:47:04 +0800

Raw message

From: mpd@netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:47:04 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: rsync and md4
In-Reply-To: <199606301747.NAA18634@jekyll.piermont.com>
Message-ID: <199606301849.LAA23313@netcom18.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Perry writes:

> I'm afraid you are totally wrong here. MD4 has been completely
> broken. I wouldn't trust it for anything. In fact, MD5 is no longer
> trustworthy, either -- it was broken recently. Stick to SHA.

Has MD5 been broken again?  Or are you referring to that little
collision problem which is unlikely to affect the security of the
typical real life application?

Thread

• Return to June 1996

• Return to July 1996

• Return to “Andrew Tridgell <tridge@arvidsjaur.anu.edu.au>”
• Return to ““David F. Ogren” <ogren@cris.com>”
• Return to ““Mark M.” <markm@voicenet.com>”
• Return to “mpd@netcom.com (Mike Duvos)”

• Return to ““Perry E. Metzger” <perry@piermont.com>”

• 1996-07-01 (Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:47:27 +0800) - Re: rsync and md4 - “David F. Ogren” <ogren@cris.com>
  • 1996-06-30 (Sun, 30 Jun 1996 15:01:44 +0800) - Re: rsync and md4 - Andrew Tridgell <tridge@arvidsjaur.anu.edu.au>
  • 1996-07-01 (Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:47:22 +0800) - Re: rsync and md4 - “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@piermont.com>
    • 1996-07-01 (Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:47:04 +0800) - Re: rsync and md4 - mpd@netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
      • 1996-07-01 (Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:46:26 +0800) - Re: rsync and md4 - “Mark M.” <markm@voicenet.com>
      • 1996-07-01 (Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:46:41 +0800) - Re: rsync and md4 - “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@piermont.com>