Timeline for Is whirlpool vulnerable to length extension attack?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 3, 2017 at 14:45 | comment | added | Maarten Bodewes♦ | Hmm, OK that's true - in case there are no pre/post processing steps added to avoid these attacks anyway. But in that case this should be put in the answer. I looked at the pages (not the code) but I could not find a mention of length extension attacks. The same with HMAC, just stating that it is not vulnerable is not enough imho. Assuming that the asker already knows why they are not applicable is not helpful. | |
| Oct 3, 2017 at 13:33 | comment | added | CodesInChaos | @MaartenBodewes The official website describes it as a Merkle-Damgård hash, which implies length extension attacks being possible. | |
| Oct 2, 2017 at 10:23 | comment | added | Maarten Bodewes♦ | About Whirlpool regarding length extension attacks. I don't see how listing the official documentation is any help./ | |
| Oct 2, 2017 at 9:36 | history | answered | Elias | CC BY-SA 3.0 |