Re: Could timestamps be replaced with MD5?

[Tobias Weingartner]

On Wednesday, April 19, Jason Henry Parker wrote:
> 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.

So it is, I stand corrected.

--Toby.