If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
MD5 it is then
-pastey- supports the following hashes: MD2, MD4, MD5, CRC-32, Adler32, Gost, Haval (128,160,192, 224, 256), SHA (1, 256, 384, 512), Tiger (128, 160, 192), RipeMD (128, 160). Most used hashes are CRC-32, MD5 and SHA. Because of popularity first two hash types (MD5 and CRC32) also have its own established file formats. CRC-32 has a file format with extension .SFV. It was designed for use in WinSFV software and was adopted by many CRC checkers. MD5 format originates from Linux. It is output of GNU md5sum utility and very established in Linux community. If you are wondering what are the numbers that are beside the word, they are related to the length of the hash calculated. Usually the longer the hash is the more it is reliable. For more information on hash algorithms or specific hash algorithm I recommend you search the internet. I recommend you use MD5 algorithm. It is more reliable than CRC-32 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
MD5 it is then
Flasherly wrote:
-pastey- supports the following hashes: MD2, MD4, MD5, CRC-32, Adler32, Gost, Haval (128,160,192, 224, 256), SHA (1, 256, 384, 512), Tiger (128, 160, 192), RipeMD (128, 160). Most used hashes are CRC-32, MD5 and SHA. Because of popularity first two hash types (MD5 and CRC32) also have its own established file formats. CRC-32 has a file format with extension .SFV. It was designed for use in WinSFV software and was adopted by many CRC checkers. MD5 format originates from Linux. It is output of GNU md5sum utility and very established in Linux community. If you are wondering what are the numbers that are beside the word, they are related to the length of the hash calculated. Usually the longer the hash is the more it is reliable. For more information on hash algorithms or specific hash algorithm I recommend you search the internet. I recommend you use MD5 algorithm. It is more reliable than CRC-32 The collision properties of MD5 are better than CRC32. But MD5 is no good for authentication purposes. It's been cracked. ******* Stick with SHA256 now for authentication. Better still, is remote attestation by signing files using the Flasherly Private Key (PKI). That covers cases where a perpetrator modifies the file with the SHA256 values stored in it for public consumption. As a user, at my end, I use the Flasherly Public Key to verify the file was created by Flasherly. The signature attests to the genuine properties of the file. Paul |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
MD5 it is then
On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 22:23:19 -0500, Paul
wrote: The collision properties of MD5 are better than CRC32. But MD5 is no good for authentication purposes. It's been cracked. ******* Stick with SHA256 now for authentication. Better still, is remote attestation by signing files using the Flasherly Private Key (PKI). That covers cases where a perpetrator modifies the file with the SHA256 values stored in it for public consumption. As a user, at my end, I use the Flasherly Public Key to verify the file was created by Flasherly. The signature attests to the genuine properties of the file. The quote posted from a commercial program over a decade ago. Looks like a later version, perhaps not much newer though, later was licensed for terms of free/share distribution. CDCheck v3.1.3.0 Copyright Mitja Perko Date [27 November 2004] [5.00MB] I'm looking into building hash tables across audio files for longer-term, collision/veracity purposes. Two copies tentatively after some initial tests for building a base for later comparative routines. MD5 still looks to be sufficient for that, a couple "aired" private volumes, at least for, with hash tables on each volume dated and built alike an initial opportunity for least potential of corruption from inception. (Some of those audio files may old themselves, but that's not say luck will continue always to favor much anything in a digital storage realm.) Seems I've recently seen MD5 floating around, presumably, still in usage for authentication, or missed altogether that note in regard for SHA256's status (albeit a SHA 512 suffix in the above iteration I have). |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|