On Dec 3, 2007, at 2:47 PM, William Allen Simpson wrote:

Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:


Keep in mind that the notary is still 'careful' -- effectively they sign the hash -- rather than the document; and state either such (e.g. in the case of some software/code where you do not hand over the actual code) or state that _a_ document was presented with said hash.

And that makes all the difference. The digital notary is not certifying the
original document.  You described the notary generating its own tuples
(credentials as presented, the hash, a timestamp, and a notarized declaration that such was presented). There is no problem, and the described attack does
not apply.

Not sure - lets take a similar example - the role of Chamber of Commerce in repetitive/renewal public tender/bid processes - who essentially makes you use an RFC 3161 service to sign any MD5 (Well - SHA1 is the actual default) for companies; typically a PDF or Word document of a bid for the purpose of 'locking' in the date of sumbission. And on unsealing day, which for tax reasons can be months later, the govt. entity just checks the MD5's versus the RFC3161 attest. (The reason for this time-stamping is threefold a) make it fair between entities regardless as to how good their postal system is, b) 'date of postoffice' is a bit buyable in some places of the world and c) some bid processes require the digital document to be hand delivered on sealing day to alleviate the confidentially burden of the govt. of keeping the bids secure).

An in-house Mallory (at the bidder) may well want to tweak things a bit and make several doctored copies with different bid levels; and send in the one joint MD5 through the RFC3161 service.

And then depending on the information leaking/gossip of the industry - choose later than the others which one to 'really' submit. As its competitors, as is common in the industry, tend to get a lot less tight lipped once the deadline has passed.

What is new is that Mallory can generate several documents with the same MD5 with a few days of 'work'.

That endagers workflows where you assume that a party cannot intentionally create more than one asset with has the same MD5.

Dw

---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to