News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Decades-Old Computer Science Conjecture Solved in Two Pages by rocqua on Friday July 26, 2019 @07:30AM (#20533944)
Sensitivity here is defined as

Take all possible input strings

Given any input string, the sensitivity of that string is how many bits you could flip that cause the output to flip.

Now take the /maximum/ of all input string sensitivities.

For e.g. a hash function, you'd want either a minimum or something like a 1st percentile.

Re:Decades-Old Computer Science Conjecture Solved in Two Pages by userbinator on Friday July 26, 2019 @07:46AM (#20534015)
For e.g. a hash function, you'd want either a minimum or something like a 1st percentile.

As far as I know, all cryptographic hash functions are sensitive to single bit-flips by design.

Re:Decades-Old Computer Science Conjecture Solved in Two Pages by rocqua on Friday July 26, 2019 @08:05AM (#20534101)
It is definitely a design goal, but I would be very surprised if sha2 did not have 2 inputs that only differ by a single bit, and have the same output.

Finding those inputs is essentially impossible, but for a true 'random oracle ' they are likely to exist.

Re:Decades-Old Computer Science Conjecture Solved in Two Pages by SilasX on Friday July 26, 2019 @08:19AM (#20534167)
Note: correct me if I’m wrong, but to be relevant to this theorem and definition of sensitivity, the two strings would have to be for the same circuit and therefore be the same length, which is much harder than finding hash collisions in general.

And I thought they had ways to construct hash functions so that all the inputs of the same length have a different output?

Re:Decades-Old Computer Science Conjecture Solved in Two Pages by Leszek on Friday July 26, 2019 @09:19AM (#20534537)
> And I thought they had ways to construct hash functions so that all the inputs of the same length have a different output?

That's trivially impossible for fixed-size hashes, by the pigeon hole principle.

Re:Decades-Old Computer Science Conjecture Solved in Two Pages by SilasX on Friday July 26, 2019 @11:43AM (#20535606)
Sorry, I meant all inputs whose length equals the output length.

The point being, for at least that case you can guarantee a sensitivity of one bit.

Re:Decades-Old Computer Science Conjecture Solved in Two Pages by lonelappde on Friday July 26, 2019 @11:00AM (#20535278)
Not if the output is longer than the input, such as for passwords
Re:Decades-Old Computer Science Conjecture Solved in Two Pages by gitrebase on Friday July 26, 2019 @11:09AM (#20535356)
I doubt any study of hash functions restricts itself to studying a very tiny subset of all possible (infinite) inputs. The security of hash functions is always studied under the assumption of arbitrary inputs.
Re:Decades-Old Computer Science Conjecture Solved in Two Pages by derefr on Friday July 26, 2019 @07:52AM (#20534046)
Yes, but sensitivity is the wrong measure to prove that. It’s the difference between a big-O and small-o complexity.
Re:Decades-Old Computer Science Conjecture Solved in Two Pages by lexpar on Friday July 26, 2019 @07:53AM (#20534050)
"Given any input string, the sensitivity of that string is how many bits you could flip that cause the output to flip."

The sensitivity of that string is the minimum number of bits that need to be changed in order to change the output?

Not being snarky - just want to see if I understand. The phrase "how many bits you could flip" is ambiguous.

Re:Decades-Old Computer Science Conjecture Solved in Two Pages by mkl on Friday July 26, 2019 @07:59AM (#20534074)
The number of single-bit flips that would change the output on their own.

From the article: "If, say, there are seven different lies you could have told that would have each separately flipped the outcome, then for your loan profile, the sensitivity of the Boolean function is seven."