https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7614

--- Comment #6 from Bill Cole <[email protected]> ---
(In reply to Sidney Markowitz from comment #5)
> (In reply to Bill Cole from comment #3)
> 
> It just occurred to me regarding the rationale you listed: If it is not
> plausible that a hypothetical attack will provide simultaneous collisions
> against two hash functions, then there still is no reason to check SHA-1,
> since there will be both SHA256 and SHA512 hashes supplied with the updates.
> 
> The argument against checking SHA-1 is that any unneeded code provides more
> places that a bug or an unexpected vulnerability could hide. Complexity is
> always the enemy of security.

An excellent point. 

Simplicity is better. Quicker to code too.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

Reply via email to