Jason Holt wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Josh Coates wrote:
<snip/>
bunch of other hashes, that was big news.  A bunch of people said "hey, it's
just a collision, we already knew hash functions have collisions," but they
didn't realize that in a truly secure hash function, *we'll never ever see
even a single one*.  And sure enough, people like Kaminsky are showing that
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<snip/>

The only formal training I've had in hashes and hash buckets was in CS235, so this might not be a good question, considering my limited know-how.

But I was wondering how you could have a hash function that never has a single collision? Wouldn't you need 'infinity' number of hash-buckets for that to happen. And all you can do is approach infinity (limits toward infinity -> oo) but never have an actual 'infinity' number of buckets. So all we try to do is to raise the number of buckets beyond such a large value that it is almost infinity (like all that hand-waving we do in math classes :). Does this mean that we can never, ever have a completely secure hash function??

o.O
--
Harshwardhan Nagaonkar
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT - 84602

--------------------
BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/


The opinions expressed in this message are the responsibility of their
author. They are not endorsed by BYU, the BYU CS Department or BYU-UUG. ___________________________________________________________________
List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list

Reply via email to