Re: SHA1 collisions found

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



W dniu 23.02.2017 o 18:12, David Lang pisze:
> On Thu, 23 Feb 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Joey Hess <id@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Since we now have collisions in valid PDF files, collisions in
>>> valid git commit and tree objects are probably able to be
>>> constructed.
>> 
>> That may be true, but 
>> https://public-inbox.org/git/Pine.LNX.4.58.0504291221250.18901@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>>
>
> it doesn't help that the Google page on this explicitly says that
> this shows that it's possible to create two different git repos that
> have the same hash but different contents.
> 
> https://shattered.it/
> 
> How is GIT affected? GIT strongly relies on SHA-1 for the
> identification and integrity checking of all file objects and
> commits. It is essentially possible to create two GIT repositories
> with the same head commit hash and different contents, say a benign
> source code and a backdoored one. An attacker could potentially
> selectively serve either repository to targeted users. This will
> require attackers to compute their own collision.

The attack on SHA-1 presented there is "identical-prefix" collision,
which is less powerful than "chosen-prefix" collision.  It is the
latter that is required to defeat SHA-1 used in object identity.
Objects in Git _must_ begin with given prefix; the use of zlib
compression adds to the difficulty.  'Forged' Git object would
simply not validate...

https://arstechnica.com/security/2017/02/at-deaths-door-for-years-widely-used-sha1-function-is-now-dead/




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]