Re:Linus' reply on Git and SHA-1 collision
by euyyn on Friday February 24, 2017 @01:18AM
(#13721493)
It's not so inconceivable, after seeing the PDF collision, to contribute to another project a commit whose hash has a collision with another malicious commit you keep up your sleeve. Not saying it's easy, but now it's on the horizon.
Re:Linus' reply on Git and SHA-1 collision
by otabdeveloper on Friday February 24, 2017 @02:25AM
(#13721740)
> Not saying it's easy, but now it's on the horizon.
Not really. It's not a preimage attack. They spent several hundred dollars to find two random byte strings with the same SHA1 hash. There's still no way to SHA1-collide a specific byte string instead of random junk.
Re:Linus' reply on Git and SHA-1 collision
by victorNicollet on Friday February 24, 2017 @06:37AM
(#13722741)
This is exactly what euyyn is saying: create two files with the same SHA1 (by adding bytes of gibberish to an unused section), commit one to the repository, and now you have an collision available.
This was his point, and it's still true. Generating a specific SHA-1 hash is still not feasible.