IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] SHA-1 vs. FNV-1

Michael D'Errico <mike-list@pobox.com> Sun, 09 May 2010 21:07 UTC

Return-Path: <mike-list@pobox.com>
X-Original-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70B223A68E4 for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 May 2010 14:07:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.111
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.111 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.001, BAYES_05=-1.11]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5xWO0Uf+Y-PL for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 May 2010 14:07:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com [208.72.237.25]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45E633A6822 for <tls@ietf.org>; Sun, 9 May 2010 14:07:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F751B1439; Sun, 9 May 2010 17:07:26 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=message-id :date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=py1cDIqdaxjh TYlyVSYxl/DrQ2w=; b=oSyJbHtHW8wCfgwoQDCqyPoXHRwBQQP8pSoaAmzLfjqs Jgvbh/RRuU3WiuUZBKvhI1mgshaU5UnUgsHS5Wfybr2sW+X6Ha0oROc1eF8t1HL4 jlINI1qm6bdxiuTMlINvKcKhZPyzYK1oFPhp9cJ3pnfmeC9AEDlU0FGIoLmPuFs=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=message-id:date :from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=jEAKIO zzob3J1htsASXsToi9BGUTgrU1J2VlxjOpcU3Zj0ImyoV0dmumcV7OStSvYDGswC 177WVYQc2jgqK0EtARbAxaRuNYWuBV2fh0AOQsaJHCW6GmPxkCJef5q+R0AL1/FN Y537lLHrbTr8S8icvt51nmC/FJEaDZeZ/bqg0=
Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix. (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92DD6B1428; Sun, 9 May 2010 17:07:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from administrators-macbook-pro.local (unknown [24.234.114.35]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EAD49B141F; Sun, 9 May 2010 17:07:19 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <4BE72406.9050605@pobox.com>
Date: Sun, 09 May 2010 14:07:18 -0700
From: Michael D'Errico <mike-list@pobox.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Macintosh/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
References: <w2sd3aa5d01005080804tbe8fdfdey77b5add371adfb8e@mail.gmail.com> <C80C5782.AA38%stefan@aaa-sec.com> <t2yd3aa5d01005091353iff713e4awf0b06b0b1570648@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <t2yd3aa5d01005091353iff713e4awf0b06b0b1570648@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Pobox-Relay-ID: DD0FB234-5BAE-11DF-B805-D033EE7EF46B-38729857!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com
Cc: tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] SHA-1 vs. FNV-1
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 May 2010 21:07:39 -0000

Eric Rescorla wrote:
> 
> Really, given that the security analysis for why you don't need a secure
> hash needs to be written in any case, and that we're NOT using MD5
> but rather SHA-1, I don't see that the argument you're presenting
> for deviating from our standard SHA-1 using practice is compelling at
> all.

Won't there be a push to get rid of SHA-1 from protocols just as there
is for MD5 today?  It seems prudent NOT to use SHA-1 precisely for the
same reason we are not using MD5.

Mike

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email