On 06/Jan/12 21:59, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> 
> The point here is to obscure the original string to the
> satisfaction of the report generator while allowing the report 
> receiver to observe that multiple reports are referring to the
> same end user.

Yes, indeed ARF recommends the /identity hash/ --that replaces a
string with itself.  SHA1 is exemplified in Appendix A, anyway.

> Basically, the usual concerns about a collision attack don’t apply
> to this use of hashes since the same party that produces the hashes
> also consumes them.

Replacing a string with "xxxxxxxx" gives better protection by
preventing any correlation.  That has a 100% collision rate.
_______________________________________________
marf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf

Reply via email to