IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Hipsec] HIT collision probability

Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.com> Sun, 04 May 2014 15:40 UTC

Return-Path: <rgm@htt-consult.com>
X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBC561A00D5 for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 4 May 2014 08:40:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mt2qB0UJds5s for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 4 May 2014 08:40:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com (klovia.htt-consult.com [IPv6:2607:f4b8:3:0:218:71ff:fe83:66b9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07A371A00AE for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Sun, 4 May 2014 08:40:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAC0362ADB for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Sun, 4 May 2014 15:40:13 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at localhost
Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (klovia.htt-consult.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xzXY3hGv9Ign for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Sun, 4 May 2014 11:40:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from lx120e.htt-consult.com (lx120e2.htt-consult.com [208.83.67.155]) (Authenticated sender: rgm@htt-consult.com) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BC26E62C33 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Sun, 4 May 2014 11:40:03 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <53665F53.6010006@htt-consult.com>
Date: Sun, 04 May 2014 11:40:03 -0400
From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: hip WG <hipsec@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/bUSoJS1YHhXtsv8f5-Yjmd5Mq7s
Subject: [Hipsec] HIT collision probability
X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." <hipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:hipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 May 2014 15:40:21 -0000

What population of HIs is needed for a 1%, 10%, 50% probability of a HIT 
collision?

I had the math once (like back in '99 or '00) and can't find it 
(probably did not survive the Eudora to Thunderbird migration). Thought 
I actually had this in a very early draft, but could not find any such 
beast.  Of course that would have been for HIPv1 HITs, not HIPv2.

Any help on the math would be appreciated.  Also does it change with PK 
algorithm or key length?  (seems not to me).


thanks

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status