Re: [Gnumed-devel] GNotary

[Sebastian Hilbert]

On Thursday 01 September 2005 09:14, Ian Haywood wrote:
> Karsten Hilbert wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 04:53:42AM +1000, Tim Churches wrote:
> >>>The hash is not md5 nut sha256 and ripmd160. I hope this makes a
> >>> differences. If not. Tough luck.
> >>
> >>SHA256 is thought to be quite safe against both colision and pre-image
> >>attacks for now.
> >
> > The important part in this remark is "for now" and not
> > "quite safe".
> >
> > Any hash is liable to be successfully attacked eventually
> > (is there an equivalent to one-time pads in "hash space" ?).
>
> Yeah, the original document. ;-)
>
> No point signing it: a signature involves a hash.
> The notary would be equivalent to a networked backup service.
> (which is of itself useful) Internet in Australia is too primitive
> for this to be commerically possible, should be feasible in DE though.
>
Apart from technical discussion all of you could help me if you say. Yes I 
would use this notary service and I would pay for it. I would pay this much.
Or. No I wouldn't use it because ... don't need it, don't want it, too 
expensive ...

Sebastian

> Ian
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnumed-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnumed-devel

-- 
Sebastian Hilbert 
Leipzig / Germany
[www.openmed.org]  -> PGP welcome, HTML ->/dev/null
ICQ: 86 07 67 86   -> No files, no URL's
VoIP: callto://address@hidden
My OS: Suse Linux. Geek by Nature, Linux by Choice