Re: SHA1 hash safety

2005-04-20 Thread David Meybohm
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 06:48:57PM -0400, C. Scott Ananian wrote: > On Tue, 19 Apr 2005, David Meybohm wrote: > > >But doesn't this require assuming the distribution of MD5 is uniform, > >and don't the papers finding collisions in less show it's not? So, your >

Re: SHA1 hash safety

2005-04-19 Thread David Meybohm
On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 12:43:23AM -0700, Andy Isaacson wrote: > > I'm not going to do the sums, but I would hazard a guess that it's more > likely your PC suffered a cosmic-ray-induced memory fault - EACH OF THE > FOUR TIMES YOU TESTED IT - causing it to report the same MD5, than that > you actua