Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | Re: Determining the encryption used |
|---|---|
| Date: | Fri, 12 May 2006 12:48:48 -0400 |
I don't mean to take it off-topic, but I couldn't resist a few comments...
However, most applications have a default preference. That is, nowadays most programs are somewhat AES-192-phile even though noone would actually recommend the use of AES (I hope).
What makes you say that? What is wrong with AES?
However, passwords or whatever stored in a database are not encrypted with a symmetric cipher most of the time (Except for DES "encoded" passwords). In this area you can usually tell the hash by the length of the stored data (but you can't correlate it to the length of the original input): 7 bytes / 56 bit -> DES
I believe the block size for DES is 64 bits, yes? Sure, the key is 56 (or 64 bits with an 8-bit checksum), but the block is different.
BTW, if you're free to choose a hash function for your program, don't use DES, MD5 or SHA1. DES isn't worth anything more than EBCDIC these days, MD5 has 8 bit of security margin left (so if you attack it, you need to bruteforce 256 possibilities to find a collision - not really hard to do), and SHA1 isn't that much safer anymore either. SHA2 isn't really good at that, but at least it didn't fall apart that much yet.
For the purpose of a one-way function, neither MD5 nor SHA1 has been broken. AFAIK, they are only vulnerable to collision attacks, not first preimage or second preimage attacks, which rely on different properties. Using these functions for specific purposes (such as hashing passwords) is perfectly fine right now.
Call to everyone: we need a new decent hash function!
Yes, we do, but not in the context you describe. tim ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This List Sponsored by: Cenzic Concerned about Web Application Security? Why not go with the #1 solution - Cenzic, the only one to win the Analyst's Choice Award from eWeek. As attacks through web applications continue to rise, you need to proactively protect your applications from hackers. Cenzic has the most comprehensive solutions to meet your application security penetration testing and vulnerability management needs. You have an option to go with a managed service (Cenzic ClickToSecure) or an enterprise software (Cenzic Hailstorm). Download FREE whitepaper on how a managed service can help you: http://www.cenzic.com/news_events/wpappsec.php And, now for a limited time we can do a FREE audit for you to confirm your results from other product. Contact us at request@cenzic.com for details. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | RFID's, Anonymous |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | accredited schools, J Kalberg |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Determining the encryption used, Tonnerre Lombard |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Determining the encryption used, Phoebe Tunstall |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |