4 ms·
By "in parallel" I don't mean XOR. I mean concatenation. So in my example sha256+md5 would concatenate sha256's 256 bit digest, and md5's 128 bit digest, to for
by petertodd 6y ago
By "in parallel" I don't mean XOR. I mean concatenation. So in my example sha256+md5 would concatenate sha256's 256 bit digest, and md5's 128 bit digest, to form a 384 bit digest.
The intuitive explanation for why XOR instead of concatenation doesn't work, is it lets the output of the broken hash function influence the output of the remaining good hash function. That is obviously cause for concern!
- Dylan16807 6y ago> The intuitive explanation for why XOR instead of concatenation doesn't work, is it lets the output of the broken hash function influence the output of the remaining good hash function. That is obviously cause for concern! The bits of a good hash function should be random. XORing with some unrelated-ish thing should be no problem. So that's not enough of an explanation.