On 01/23/2013 06:25 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:38 PM, Dave Angel <d...@davea.name> wrote:
You think it's an accident that md5 size is roughly equivalent to 39 decimal
digits?  Or that the ones that haven't been proven insecure are much larger
than that?  The sha512 hash is roughly equivalent to 154 decimal digits.

Proving a hash function secure or not is orthogonal to its length. You
could have a cryptographically secure hash function that produces a
single byte; you'd get collisions pretty often, but that's understood.
Conversely, you could have an insecure hash that produces a value
several orders of magnitude longer than SHA512. Look at this:

def big_long_hash(val):
     return sum(bytes(str(val),"utf-8"))*12345678901234567890

But longer hashes do reduce the chance of collisions, by the
fundamental rules of mathematics.


I certainly can't disagree that it's easy to produce a very long hash that isn't at all secure. But I would disagree that longer hashes *automatically* reduce chances of collision.

Anyway, about cryptographically ...

OK, I'd like to learn here. I thought that "cryptographically secure" meant that it was infeasible to take a given message and make an innocuous change to it (such as adding a trailer of whatever size) and from that produce a predetermined hash value.

Obviously "infeasible" will change over time. But if my definition is even close, then wouldn't it be a necessary (not sufficient) condition that the hash be at least some certain size. It is that size I was trying to impress on the OP.

Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptographic_hash_function

seems to say that there are four requirements.
it is easy to compute the hash value for any given message
it is infeasible to generate a message that has a given hash
it is infeasible to modify a message without changing the hash
it is infeasible to find two different messages with the same hash


Seems to me a small hash wouldn't be able to meet the last 3 conditions.




--
DaveA
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Reply via email to