Matches for sha1, 135 total results Sorted by newest | relevance
Fri Oct 09 01:56:06 UTC 2015 <asciilifeform> my original observation, though, stands - the time to stop thinking of pgp 64bit fp as 'the man' is not when arbitrarily colliding sha1 costs a penny! it is now.
Fri Oct 09 01:28:32 UTC 2015 <assbot> how close is OpenPGP tied to SHA1 ... ( http://bit.ly/1jeUdnW )
Fri Oct 09 01:18:48 UTC 2015 <asciilifeform> it does not contain the modulus he signs with. only bottom 64b of the sha1 of....
Fri Oct 09 01:16:36 UTC 2015 <asciilifeform> which is hardcoded to sha1..
Fri Oct 09 01:13:48 UTC 2015 <asciilifeform> mircea_popescu: cost of a sha1 collision is less than a year of schmuck pay at this point.
Thu Oct 08 18:36:09 UTC 2015 <assbot> REWARD offered for hash collisions for SHA1, SHA256, RIPEMD160 and other ... ( http://bit.ly/1Pk0VFC )
Thu Oct 08 18:23:32 UTC 2015 <assbot> Logged on 24-09-2015 14:12:48; asciilifeform: http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=24-09-2015#1284625 << aha. but ever notice that it's sha1, and can't be changed to anything else? and, likewise, self-sigs are hardcoded to use sha1? it is pestilentially pervasive in the rfc, and Must Die
Tue Oct 06 16:18:57 UTC 2015 <assbot> Logged on 24-09-2015 14:12:48; asciilifeform: http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=24-09-2015#1284625 << aha. but ever notice that it's sha1, and can't be changed to anything else? and, likewise, self-sigs are hardcoded to use sha1? it is pestilentially pervasive in the rfc, and Must Die
Tue Oct 06 16:17:10 UTC 2015 <assbot> Logged on 25-09-2015 01:45:37; asciilifeform: http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=25-09-2015#1285102 << presently they are quite unlike! hash type for general-purpose message signing is ~selectable~ from the handful of traditional algos; hash for signature ~of keys~ is hardwired to sha1 !
Fri Sep 25 01:45:37 UTC 2015 <asciilifeform> http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=25-09-2015#1285102 << presently they are quite unlike! hash type for general-purpose message signing is ~selectable~ from the handful of traditional algos; hash for signature ~of keys~ is hardwired to sha1 !
Fri Sep 25 01:45:37 UTC 2015 <assbot> Logged on 25-09-2015 00:28:18; mircea_popescu: http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=24-09-2015#1284796 << i suspek that's what they were trying to do with the sha1.
Fri Sep 25 00:28:18 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=24-09-2015#1284796 << i suspek that's what they were trying to do with the sha1.
Thu Sep 24 14:12:48 UTC 2015 <asciilifeform> http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=24-09-2015#1284625 << aha. but ever notice that it's sha1, and can't be changed to anything else? and, likewise, self-sigs are hardcoded to use sha1? it is pestilentially pervasive in the rfc, and Must Die
Sat Aug 08 23:12:59 UTC 2015 <mod6> If that's what you mean. So in this case, SHA1 instead of SHA256, unless that's not what you were referring to.
Sat Aug 08 23:12:10 UTC 2015 <mod6> <+hanbot> re ml: where are sha256sums for, eg, http://therealbitcoin.org/ml/btc-dev/2015-February/000040.html (patch)? << Hi, in the case of that patch email, the SHA1 sum is embedded in the file name. For example: asciilifeform_dnsseed_snipsnip_192f7bc7c14c1d31c7b417c9cd77be51c4d255f2.patch -- if you were to download this patch, you could then run `sha1sum asciilifeform_dnsseed_snipsnip_192f7bc7c14c1d31c7b417c9cd77be51c4d255f2.patch` and it sh
Fri Jul 31 19:03:54 UTC 2015 <ben_vulpes> sha1 matches the value in the providers sig tho
Thu Jul 23 18:43:19 UTC 2015 <trinque> tls 1.0, sha1 sigs, lol
Wed Jul 22 03:11:11 UTC 2015 <trinque> dat sha1
Sat May 16 22:00:42 UTC 2015 <jurov> ah that. so, thinking about ECL, one basically needs to put together 2x80 identical circuits for two rouds of SHA1, and pipeline them, no?
Wed May 06 23:57:00 UTC 2015 <asciilifeform> sha1