Re: Added hashes.

Ian Stirling <root@mauve.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> Given that assorted hashes (rc4,md5) seem to all have a finite lifespan,
> with others showing possible weaknesses.
> Isn't it more secure to hash a file by hashing it twice with two seperate
> functions, and then xoring the result?

I'd not xor the result but keep both results (e.g. append hash 1 to hash
2). So if somebody is able to produce a plaintext for hash 1 (say MD5),
chances should be very low that it also matches hash 2 (say SHA1). But I
would only consider this for long-time archiving.

This should[1] also significantly lower the probability of a hash
collision.

Bye, Tino.

[1] read "sounds logical to me but I'm not a cryptologist."
Received on Fri Dec 23 20:09:37 2005