Talk:SHA-1/Archive 1: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Priority 3 TODO list
Line 405:
: There is an (English) [http://en.epochtimes.com/news/7-1-11/50336.html article] about the subject. --[[User:JVersteeg|JVersteeg]] 10:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
::This article is useless and misleading, it doesn't mention a single relevant detail about the attack itself. -- [[User:Intgr|intgr]] 15:23, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
: The paper that you refer to, does not even talk about SHA-1. Rather it shows attaks against MD5, RIPEMD and SHA-0. How is this supposed to show a new SHA-1 vulnerability? The article in epochtimes is so badly written that it is not possible to determine whether they are talking about a new attack or one that has already been published. If there are no other reports of a new attack, then it is probably safe to assume that epochtime is just recycling an old story. [[User:85.2.45.127|85.2.45.127]] 21:59, 27 January 2007 (UTC)