Re: Added hashes.

Juuso Hukkanen <juuso_12_2003@tele3d.net> writes:
> Ok, fellows time to say you still can't prove that, nothing is secure
> and nothing can't be assumed. Anyway Thanks for highlighting the
> hidden dependency factor, I believe I have now taken this as far as
> can be resonable expected and I think now to be able to eliminate a
> resonable amount of expected dependencies.

Does it occur to you that the specialists who design hash primitives
are trying to do the exact same thing, though in a more sophisticated
way? Their constructions have been observed to still occasionally
fail. Why do you think yours are better?
Received on Fri Dec 23 20:10:15 2005