IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: FW: New Version Notification for draft-rafiee-6man-cga-attack-00.txt

"Hosnieh Rafiee" <ietf@rozanak.com> Sun, 01 December 2013 22:27 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@rozanak.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E2691AE1A0 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Dec 2013 14:27:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] 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 Xy2tMC5dcMsM for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Dec 2013 14:27:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.195]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4317B1ADF26 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 1 Dec 2013 14:27:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from kopoli (g226058092.adsl.alicedsl.de [92.226.58.92]) by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mrus4) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0LlUid-1VEBFa0MXn-00axn8; Sun, 01 Dec 2013 17:27:39 -0500
From: Hosnieh Rafiee <ietf@rozanak.com>
To: 'marcelo bagnulo braun' <marcelo@it.uc3m.es>, 'Christian Huitema' <huitema@microsoft.com>, 'Ray Hunter' <v6ops@globis.net>
References: <005601ceec99$ed4cfc40$c7e6f4c0$@rozanak.com> <C91E67751B1EFF41B857DE2FE1F68ABA2FBC395D@tk5ex14mbxc272.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <000001ceecd4$a69b4aa0$f3d1dfe0$@rozanak.com> <529845A5.5060807@it.uc3m.es> <001101ceeedf$da768080$8f638180$@rozanak.com> <529BB70F.1060804@it.uc3m.es>
In-Reply-To: <529BB70F.1060804@it.uc3m.es>
Subject: RE: FW: New Version Notification for draft-rafiee-6man-cga-attack-00.txt
Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2013 23:27:28 +0100
Message-ID: <001401ceeee4$8a1af620$9e50e260$@rozanak.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQE9GJPvaSDmmxKcFe2y5aQoBrVllQKrUp7gAeLS6X0CJEgPzQImiBMUAQ6LaCibFFtoIA==
Content-Language: en-us
X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:2jaqCe21Bnlqx1F66lw0fhwWODbZOiOJA0p7ji4NXuW +HMBbmcOF3vVjr9Lhy3jmx6qp4KwAR2OTe3TqAO06bL+a3Mm6T qYMXd8J8q3BSSiCxegq8XkP3Em0/wZZHUYp8WSbC/J6mEWtSA3 yQF0SNjVtXd69BMtA8ln3ivCBtQmR5p4YXJizxTZhrJ6wLoc6d WGeMwpHULb6a5xZRdYVgQN0WlmFgo9qe0vZcWypmTXSkdHBqmj mVE1GK0qmQD3hqzpOIMreEcVpHM9kHRQwx/7DfGfixsV6ev5p3 fmHpes2Vp9rSmdF92Ddmwg+nUc8BOpzFzNR5qKqYo32+gGzyyV 2iXMDTgn2UxfXt9Nm3EA=
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org, 'Erik Nordmark' <nordmark@sonic.net>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2013 22:27:49 -0000

> > Birthday attack is still possible with the following approach. Check
> > this nice article.
> > http://eprint.iacr.org/2003/065.pdf
> 
> I just skimmed the paper and it seems to state that in some hash functions
> fewer attemps are needed to find a clash.
> This does not contradicts my statement. Birthday paradox can be used to
find
> tow values that clash, not to find a preimage of a given target value.
> 

What I understood from reading it is that, they want to find the possible
collision for any given value. So, I saw the similarity of our case. What we
wanna do is to find a collision for the value of legitimate node.

Smile,
Hosnieh

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email