On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 12:46:28PM +0100, Karel Gardas wrote: > Sorry! That's just my short-cut of the whole problem. As I've already > written I don't agree fully with Ivan's statements, but this does not > change anything on the fact that MD5 is broken.
MD5 is not broken. That's a myth. Stop spreading it. > Yes, I agree, but combining two hashes from which one is considered broken > and one is considered weak these days is IMHO less secure than using one > hash which is considered secure. Your opinion is stupid and wrong, and there are no hashes which are 'considered secure' anyway. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
