Re: Could timestamps be replaced with MD5?

[Jason Henry Parker]

Tobias Weingartner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Also, the "rsync algorithm" uses 2 sums.  One of them is MD5, so in
> some sense, rsync is at least as good as us using MD5.  Also, the other
> algorithm is optimized for speed, not "collision" detection.  It is
> *not* particularly resistant to "chance of error", that is why they
> author used MD5 as the "authoratative sum" within his algorithm.

Wrong; rsync uses the 16-byte MD4 checksum, which is less (heh)
accurate than MD5, but apparently much faster to calculate.  The other
checksum used is ``a simple 32 bit checksum that can be upadted from
either end (inspired by Mark Adler's Adler-32 checksum)'', according
to checksum.c in the 2.4.1 sources.

There has been enough FUD about MD5 on this list already without
adding further inaccuracy, even if it is a simple mistake.

jason
-- 
The Patently Ridiculous:
http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?pn=US06025810__