pgpfan:mdc
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision | Next revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
| pgpfan:mdc [2022/05/28 20:54] – [A Less Intuitive, More Technical Explanation] Awkward phrasing b.walzer | pgpfan:mdc [2022/07/18 22:56] – Link to new editorial b.walzer | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 56: | Line 56: | ||
| The MDC uses the SHA1 method for the hash. Not everyone knows that the discovered weakness in SHA1 is irrelevant to the MDC. I suppose you could redefine it as the "MDC hash" and specify that it only needs to be irreversible to prevent unnecessary angst. In general, the MDC is likely to be resistant to weaknesses in the hash due to the fact that the stored hash is encrypted and randomized by the random data which makes it very hard to mess with. | The MDC uses the SHA1 method for the hash. Not everyone knows that the discovered weakness in SHA1 is irrelevant to the MDC. I suppose you could redefine it as the "MDC hash" and specify that it only needs to be irreversible to prevent unnecessary angst. In general, the MDC is likely to be resistant to weaknesses in the hash due to the fact that the stored hash is encrypted and randomized by the random data which makes it very hard to mess with. | ||
| - | The MDC is secure and is well suited to the sort of offline encryption that the OpenPGP standard embodies. Proposals to add one or more encrypted authenticated modes and depreciate the MDC don't make sense to me. We would be better off if we simply did nothing. | + | The MDC is secure and is well suited to the sort of offline encryption that the OpenPGP standard embodies. |
| =====A Less Intuitive, More Technical Explanation===== | =====A Less Intuitive, More Technical Explanation===== | ||
pgpfan/mdc.txt · Last modified: 2023/12/11 13:30 by b.walzer