From owner-freebsd-security Sat May 30 03:58:43 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA29124 for freebsd-security-outgoing; Sat, 30 May 1998 03:58:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from cheops.anu.edu.au (avalon@cheops.anu.edu.au [150.203.76.24]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id DAA29114; Sat, 30 May 1998 03:58:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au) Message-Id: <199805301058.DAA29114@hub.freebsd.org> Received: by cheops.anu.edu.au (1.37.109.16/16.2) id AA219545902; Sat, 30 May 1998 20:58:22 +1000 From: Darren Reed Subject: Re: MD5 v. DES? To: sysadmin@mfn.org (J.A. Terranson) Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 20:58:21 +1000 (EST) Cc: gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG, opsys@mail.webspan.net, ckempf@enigami.com, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <01BD8B6C.68192890@w3svcs.mfn.org> from "J.A. Terranson" at May 30, 98 01:43:54 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org In some mail from J.A. Terranson, sie said: > > > 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. Isn't MD-5 also classed as a cryptographic checksum or is that just limited to SHA-1 and RIPE-MD ? Darren To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe security" in the body of the message