From owner-freebsd-security Fri May 29 23:45:16 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA02614 for freebsd-security-outgoing; Fri, 29 May 1998 23:45:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from dc1.mfn.org (dc1.mfn.org [204.238.179.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id XAA02447; Fri, 29 May 1998 23:44:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sysadmin@mfn.org) Received: from w3svcs.mfn.org (unverified [204.238.179.11]) by mail.mfn.org (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.83) with SMTP id ; Sat, 30 May 1998 01:46:45 -0500 Received: by w3svcs.mfn.org with Microsoft Mail id <01BD8B6C.68192890@w3svcs.mfn.org>; Sat, 30 May 1998 01:43:55 -0500 Message-ID: <01BD8B6C.68192890@w3svcs.mfn.org> From: "J.A. Terranson" To: "'Gary Palmer'" , Open Systems Networking Cc: Cory Kempf , "freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG" Subject: RE: MD5 v. DES? Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 01:43:54 -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Actually, this question is nonsensical, as MD5 and DES are two *entirely* different things. MD5 (Message Digest [algorithm] 5) is a *hash* function: It does *NOT* encrypt! What is does is provide a "one way" pseudo-signature based on the contents of the file it is run against. What makes this a "one way" function is that you can get a hash (signature) from a file, but you *cannot* get a file from an hash! DES (Data Encryption Standard [modified LUCIFER]) is a two-way *encryption* function. Not only can you reduce a file to an indecipherable mess, but you can take the mess, and recover the original file. Unfortunately, comparing MD5 and DES is an "apples and oranges" proposition... J.A. Terranson sysadmin@mfn.org > > Is there a discussion somewhere about the merits of MD5 v. DES? > > E.g. what advantages one has over the other? > > If I recall from past memories MD5 i believe is faster. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe security" in the body of the message