[43402] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Exponent 3 damage spreads...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jostein Tveit)
Fri Sep 15 08:56:01 2006
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
To: pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz (Peter Gutmann)
Cc: jas@extundo.com, cryptography@metzdowd.com
From: Jostein Tveit <josteitv@pvv.ntnu.no>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 10:56:28 +0200
In-Reply-To: <E1GO0Tx-0008Av-00@medusa01.cs.auckland.ac.nz> (Peter Gutmann's
message of "Fri, 15 Sep 2006 11:18:57 +1200")
pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz (Peter Gutmann) writes:
> What's more scary is that if anyone introduces a parameterised hash (it's
> quite possible that this has already happened in some fields, and with the
> current interest in randomised hashes it's only a matter of time before we see
> these anyway) [...]
Both Rivest and Shamir said that they want a parameterised hash
according to Paul Hoffman's "Notes from the Hash Futures Panel".
<URL: http://www.proper.com/lookit/hash-futures-panel-notes.html >
Maybe thats not so good after all.
Or maybe the "not so good thing" here is exponent equal to 3...
--
Jostein Tveit <josteitv@pvv.ntnu.no>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
