Skip to main content
small typo: dividing.
Source Link
kelalaka
  • 49.5k
  • 12
  • 118
  • 205

Could is also be possible to generate $H(\text{message}[1..n-1])$ from $H(\text{message}[1..n])$ if I know the last byte?

No, the length extension attacks are not working exactly like that. Let see how MD5 operates;

MD5 divides a message into 512-bit blocks to operate1 in Merkle–Damgård fashion way. Every message is padded. The messages are padded with 1 and following many zeroes so that the padded message size is multiple of 512 with the message length appended at the end represented in 64 bits. In a minimum way with always 1 is added the number of zeroes can be zero.

More formally, add bit 1 than add as many as required bit 0 until message length in bits $\equiv 448 \pmod{512}$ then add the message length in 64 bits. This also limits the file size that can be hashed with MD5.

So the $message[1..n-1]$ is calculated with $message[1..n-1] \mathbin\| padding$. After the padded message one can execute the length extension attack. The extended message with padding is;

$$\text{message}[1..n-1] \mathbin\| \text{padding} \mathbin\| \text{extension}\mathbin\|\text{padding}$$

To execute a length extension attack, one replaces the initial value of the target hash function with the hash. After this calculate the extended hash as usual hashing. Formally

  • let $\text{MD5}'(m,\text{MD5IV}) = \text{MD5}(m)$. I.e. $\text{MD5}'$ enables to control of the IV of the MD5.
  • let $h = MD5(m)$ of a message $m$.
  • then $h' = MD5'(m', h) = MD5(m\mathbin\|pad_1\mathbin\|m'\mathbin\|pad_2)$ where the $pad_1$ is the padding of $m$ when hashed with MD5 and $pad_2$ is the padding of $m\mathbin\|pad_1\mathbin\|m'$

The $h'$ is the length extended hash.

Might it become possible, when I just want to shorten the message by just one byte in any of MD5, SHA1 or SHA2? Or could I at least reduce the computational cost of a brute force attack?

After SHA3, there are variants of SHA2 like SHA512-256 that calculates a hash of output size 512 bits then truncates to 256. That almost eradicate the length extension attack's possibility. The SHA512-256 has a different initial value from SHA512-512 that separates the domains. In other words, they are different random oracles.

Of course, the pre-image resistance and secondary pre-image resistance and the collision resistance are weakened by $2^8$, $2^8$, and $\sqrt{2^8}$, respectively.


1The dividing is not specific to MD5 and divingdividing size may change with each hash function like SHA512 uses 1024 bit block sizes

Could is also be possible to generate $H(\text{message}[1..n-1])$ from $H(\text{message}[1..n])$ if I know the last byte?

No, the length extension attacks are not working exactly like that. Let see how MD5 operates;

MD5 divides a message into 512-bit blocks to operate1 in Merkle–Damgård fashion way. Every message is padded. The messages are padded with 1 and following many zeroes so that the padded message size is multiple of 512 with the message length appended at the end represented in 64 bits. In a minimum way with always 1 is added the number of zeroes can be zero.

More formally, add bit 1 than add as many as required bit 0 until message length in bits $\equiv 448 \pmod{512}$ then add the message length in 64 bits. This also limits the file size that can be hashed with MD5.

So the $message[1..n-1]$ is calculated with $message[1..n-1] \mathbin\| padding$. After the padded message one can execute the length extension attack. The extended message with padding is;

$$\text{message}[1..n-1] \mathbin\| \text{padding} \mathbin\| \text{extension}\mathbin\|\text{padding}$$

To execute a length extension attack, one replaces the initial value of the target hash function with the hash. After this calculate the extended hash as usual hashing. Formally

  • let $\text{MD5}'(m,\text{MD5IV}) = \text{MD5}(m)$. I.e. $\text{MD5}'$ enables to control of the IV of the MD5.
  • let $h = MD5(m)$ of a message $m$.
  • then $h' = MD5'(m', h) = MD5(m\mathbin\|pad_1\mathbin\|m'\mathbin\|pad_2)$ where the $pad_1$ is the padding of $m$ when hashed with MD5 and $pad_2$ is the padding of $m\mathbin\|pad_1\mathbin\|m'$

The $h'$ is the length extended hash.

Might it become possible, when I just want to shorten the message by just one byte in any of MD5, SHA1 or SHA2? Or could I at least reduce the computational cost of a brute force attack?

After SHA3, there are variants of SHA2 like SHA512-256 that calculates a hash of output size 512 bits then truncates to 256. That almost eradicate the length extension attack's possibility. The SHA512-256 has a different initial value from SHA512-512 that separates the domains. In other words, they are different random oracles.

Of course, the pre-image resistance and secondary pre-image resistance and the collision resistance are weakened by $2^8$, $2^8$, and $\sqrt{2^8}$, respectively.


1The dividing is not specific to MD5 and diving size may change with each hash function like SHA512 uses 1024 bit block sizes

Could is also be possible to generate $H(\text{message}[1..n-1])$ from $H(\text{message}[1..n])$ if I know the last byte?

No, the length extension attacks are not working exactly like that. Let see how MD5 operates;

MD5 divides a message into 512-bit blocks to operate1 in Merkle–Damgård fashion way. Every message is padded. The messages are padded with 1 and following many zeroes so that the padded message size is multiple of 512 with the message length appended at the end represented in 64 bits. In a minimum way with always 1 is added the number of zeroes can be zero.

More formally, add bit 1 than add as many as required bit 0 until message length in bits $\equiv 448 \pmod{512}$ then add the message length in 64 bits. This also limits the file size that can be hashed with MD5.

So the $message[1..n-1]$ is calculated with $message[1..n-1] \mathbin\| padding$. After the padded message one can execute the length extension attack. The extended message with padding is;

$$\text{message}[1..n-1] \mathbin\| \text{padding} \mathbin\| \text{extension}\mathbin\|\text{padding}$$

To execute a length extension attack, one replaces the initial value of the target hash function with the hash. After this calculate the extended hash as usual hashing. Formally

  • let $\text{MD5}'(m,\text{MD5IV}) = \text{MD5}(m)$. I.e. $\text{MD5}'$ enables to control of the IV of the MD5.
  • let $h = MD5(m)$ of a message $m$.
  • then $h' = MD5'(m', h) = MD5(m\mathbin\|pad_1\mathbin\|m'\mathbin\|pad_2)$ where the $pad_1$ is the padding of $m$ when hashed with MD5 and $pad_2$ is the padding of $m\mathbin\|pad_1\mathbin\|m'$

The $h'$ is the length extended hash.

Might it become possible, when I just want to shorten the message by just one byte in any of MD5, SHA1 or SHA2? Or could I at least reduce the computational cost of a brute force attack?

After SHA3, there are variants of SHA2 like SHA512-256 that calculates a hash of output size 512 bits then truncates to 256. That almost eradicate the length extension attack's possibility. The SHA512-256 has a different initial value from SHA512-512 that separates the domains. In other words, they are different random oracles.

Of course, the pre-image resistance and secondary pre-image resistance and the collision resistance are weakened by $2^8$, $2^8$, and $\sqrt{2^8}$, respectively.


1The dividing is not specific to MD5 and dividing size may change with each hash function like SHA512 uses 1024 bit block sizes

polish
Source Link
kelalaka
  • 49.5k
  • 12
  • 118
  • 205

Could is also be possible to generate $H(\text{message}[1..n-1])$ from $H(\text{message}[1..n])$ if I know the last byte?

No, the length extension attacks are not working exactly like that. Let see how MD5 operates;

MD5 divides a message into 512-bit blocks to operate1 in Merkle–Damgård fashion way. Every message is padded. The messages are padded with 1 and following many zeroes so that the padded message size is multiple of 512 with the message length appended at the end represented in 64 bits. In a minimum way with always 1 is added the number of zeroes can be zero.

More formally, add bit 1 than add as many as required bit 0 until message length in bits $\equiv 448 \pmod{512}$ then add the message length in 64 bits. This also limits the file size that can be hashed with MD5.

So the $message[1..n-1]$ is calculated with $message[1..n-1] | padding$$message[1..n-1] \mathbin\| padding$. After the padded message one can execute the length extension attack. The extended message with padding is;

$$\text{message}[1..n-1] | \text{padding} | \text{extension}|\text{padding}$$$$\text{message}[1..n-1] \mathbin\| \text{padding} \mathbin\| \text{extension}\mathbin\|\text{padding}$$

To execute a length extension attack, one replaces the initial value of the target hash function with the hash. After this calculate the extended hash as usual hashing. Formally

  • let $\text{MD5}'(m,\text{MD5IV}) = \text{MD5}(m)$. I.e. $\text{MD5}'$ enables to control of the IV of the MD5.
  • let $h = MD5(m)$ of a message $m$.
  • then $h' = MD5'(m', h) = MD5(m\mathbin\|pad_1\mathbin\|m'\mathbin\|pad_2)$ where the $pad_1$ is the padding of $m$ when hashed with MD5 and $pad_2$ is the padding of $m\mathbin\|pad_1\mathbin\|m'$

The $h'$ is the length extended hash.

Might it become possible, when I just want to shorten the message by just one byte in any of MD5, SHA1 or SHA2? Or could I at least reduce the computational cost of a brute force attack?

After SHA3, there are variants of SHA2 like SHA512-256 that calculates a hash of output size 512 bits then truncates to 256. That almost eradicate the length extension attack's possibility. The SHA512-256 has a different initial value from SHA512-512 that separates the domains. In other words, they are different random oracles.

Of course, the pre-image resistance and secondary pre-image resistance and the collision resistance are weakened by $2^8$, $2^8$, and $\sqrt{2^8}$, respectively.


1The dividing is not specific to MD5 and diving size may change with each hash function like SHA512 uses 1024 bit block sizes

Could is also be possible to generate $H(\text{message}[1..n-1])$ from $H(\text{message}[1..n])$ if I know the last byte?

No, the length extension attacks are not working exactly like that. Let see how MD5 operates;

MD5 divides a message into 512-bit blocks to operate1 in Merkle–Damgård fashion way. Every message is padded. The messages are padded with 1 and following many zeroes so that the padded message size is multiple of 512 with the message length appended at the end represented in 64 bits. In a minimum way with always 1 is added the number of zeroes can be zero.

More formally, add bit 1 than add as many as required bit 0 until message length in bits $\equiv 448 \pmod{512}$ then add the message length in 64 bits. This also limits the file size that can be hashed with MD5.

So the $message[1..n-1]$ is calculated with $message[1..n-1] | padding$. After the padded message one can execute the length extension attack. The extended message with padding is;

$$\text{message}[1..n-1] | \text{padding} | \text{extension}|\text{padding}$$

Might it become possible, when I just want to shorten the message by just one byte in any of MD5, SHA1 or SHA2? Or could I at least reduce the computational cost of a brute force attack?

After SHA3, there are variants of SHA2 like SHA512-256 that calculates a hash of output size 512 bits then truncates to 256. That almost eradicate the length extension attack's possibility. The SHA512-256 has a different initial value from SHA512-512 that separates the domains. In other words, they are different random oracles.

Of course, the pre-image resistance and secondary pre-image resistance and the collision resistance are weakened by $2^8$, $2^8$, and $\sqrt{2^8}$, respectively.


1The dividing is not specific to MD5 and diving size may change with each hash function like SHA512 uses 1024 bit block sizes

Could is also be possible to generate $H(\text{message}[1..n-1])$ from $H(\text{message}[1..n])$ if I know the last byte?

No, the length extension attacks are not working exactly like that. Let see how MD5 operates;

MD5 divides a message into 512-bit blocks to operate1 in Merkle–Damgård fashion way. Every message is padded. The messages are padded with 1 and following many zeroes so that the padded message size is multiple of 512 with the message length appended at the end represented in 64 bits. In a minimum way with always 1 is added the number of zeroes can be zero.

More formally, add bit 1 than add as many as required bit 0 until message length in bits $\equiv 448 \pmod{512}$ then add the message length in 64 bits. This also limits the file size that can be hashed with MD5.

So the $message[1..n-1]$ is calculated with $message[1..n-1] \mathbin\| padding$. After the padded message one can execute the length extension attack. The extended message with padding is;

$$\text{message}[1..n-1] \mathbin\| \text{padding} \mathbin\| \text{extension}\mathbin\|\text{padding}$$

To execute a length extension attack, one replaces the initial value of the target hash function with the hash. After this calculate the extended hash as usual hashing. Formally

  • let $\text{MD5}'(m,\text{MD5IV}) = \text{MD5}(m)$. I.e. $\text{MD5}'$ enables to control of the IV of the MD5.
  • let $h = MD5(m)$ of a message $m$.
  • then $h' = MD5'(m', h) = MD5(m\mathbin\|pad_1\mathbin\|m'\mathbin\|pad_2)$ where the $pad_1$ is the padding of $m$ when hashed with MD5 and $pad_2$ is the padding of $m\mathbin\|pad_1\mathbin\|m'$

The $h'$ is the length extended hash.

Might it become possible, when I just want to shorten the message by just one byte in any of MD5, SHA1 or SHA2? Or could I at least reduce the computational cost of a brute force attack?

After SHA3, there are variants of SHA2 like SHA512-256 that calculates a hash of output size 512 bits then truncates to 256. That almost eradicate the length extension attack's possibility. The SHA512-256 has a different initial value from SHA512-512 that separates the domains. In other words, they are different random oracles.

Of course, the pre-image resistance and secondary pre-image resistance and the collision resistance are weakened by $2^8$, $2^8$, and $\sqrt{2^8}$, respectively.


1The dividing is not specific to MD5 and diving size may change with each hash function like SHA512 uses 1024 bit block sizes

polish
Source Link
kelalaka
  • 49.5k
  • 12
  • 118
  • 205

Could is also be possible to generate H(message[1..n-1])$H(\text{message}[1..n-1])$ from H(message[1..n])$H(\text{message}[1..n])$ if I know the last byte?

No, the length extension attacks are not working exactly like that. Let see how MD5 operates;

MD5 usesdivides a message into 512-bit block sizeblocks to operate1 in Merkle–Damgård fashion way. If theEvery message size is padded. The messages are padded with 1 and following many zeroes so that the padded message size is multiple of 512 with the message length appended at the end represented in 64 bits. In a minimum way with always 1 is added the number of zeroes can be zero.

More formally, add bit 1 andthan add as many as required bit 0 bit until message length in bits $\equiv 448 \pmod{512}$ then add the message length in 64 bits. This also limits the file size that can be hashed with MD5.

So the $message[1..n-1]$ is calculated with $message[1..n-1] | padding$. After the padded message one can execute the length extension attack. The extended message with padding is;

$$\text{message}[1..n-1] | \text{padding} | \text{extension}|\text{padding}$$

Might it become possible, when I just want to shorten the message by just one byte in any of MD5, SHA1 or SHA2? Or could I at least reduce the computational cost of a brute force attack?

After SHA3, there are variants of SHA2 like SHA512-256 that calculates a hash of output size 512 bits then truncates to 256. That almost eradicate the length extension attack's possibility. The SHA512-256 has a different initial value from SHA512-512 that separates the domains. In other words, they are different random oracles.

Of course, the pre-image resistance and secondary pre-image resistance and the collision resistance are weakenweakened by $2^8$, $2^8$, and $\sqrt{2^8}$, respectively.


1The dividing is not specific to MD5 and diving size may change with each hash function like SHA512 uses 1024 bit block sizes

Could is also be possible to generate H(message[1..n-1]) from H(message[1..n]) if I know the last byte?

No, the length extension attacks are not working exactly like that.

MD5 uses 512-bit block size to operate. If the message size is padded with 1 and many zeroes so that the padded message size is multiple of 512 with the message length at the end in 64 bits. In a minimum way with always 1 is added.

More formally, add 1 and add 0 bit until message length in bits $\equiv 448 \pmod{512}$ then add the message length in 64 bits. This also limits the file size that can be hashed with MD5.

So the $message[1..n-1]$ is calculated with $message[1..n-1] | padding$. After the padded message one can execute the length extension attack. The extended message with padding is;

$$\text{message}[1..n-1] | \text{padding} | \text{extension}|\text{padding}$$

Might it become possible, when I just want to shorten the message by just one byte in any of MD5, SHA1 or SHA2? Or could I at least reduce the computational cost of a brute force attack?

After SHA3, there are variants of SHA2 like SHA512-256 that calculates a hash of output size 512 bits then truncates to 256. That almost eradicate the length extension attack's possibility. The SHA512-256 has a different initial value from SHA512-512 that separates the domains. In other words, they are different random oracles.

Of course, the pre-image resistance and secondary pre-image resistance and the collision resistance are weaken by $2^8$, $2^8$, and $\sqrt{2^8}$, respectively.

Could is also be possible to generate $H(\text{message}[1..n-1])$ from $H(\text{message}[1..n])$ if I know the last byte?

No, the length extension attacks are not working exactly like that. Let see how MD5 operates;

MD5 divides a message into 512-bit blocks to operate1 in Merkle–Damgård fashion way. Every message is padded. The messages are padded with 1 and following many zeroes so that the padded message size is multiple of 512 with the message length appended at the end represented in 64 bits. In a minimum way with always 1 is added the number of zeroes can be zero.

More formally, add bit 1 than add as many as required bit 0 until message length in bits $\equiv 448 \pmod{512}$ then add the message length in 64 bits. This also limits the file size that can be hashed with MD5.

So the $message[1..n-1]$ is calculated with $message[1..n-1] | padding$. After the padded message one can execute the length extension attack. The extended message with padding is;

$$\text{message}[1..n-1] | \text{padding} | \text{extension}|\text{padding}$$

Might it become possible, when I just want to shorten the message by just one byte in any of MD5, SHA1 or SHA2? Or could I at least reduce the computational cost of a brute force attack?

After SHA3, there are variants of SHA2 like SHA512-256 that calculates a hash of output size 512 bits then truncates to 256. That almost eradicate the length extension attack's possibility. The SHA512-256 has a different initial value from SHA512-512 that separates the domains. In other words, they are different random oracles.

Of course, the pre-image resistance and secondary pre-image resistance and the collision resistance are weakened by $2^8$, $2^8$, and $\sqrt{2^8}$, respectively.


1The dividing is not specific to MD5 and diving size may change with each hash function like SHA512 uses 1024 bit block sizes

are
Source Link
kelalaka
  • 49.5k
  • 12
  • 118
  • 205
Loading
added 77 characters in body
Source Link
kelalaka
  • 49.5k
  • 12
  • 118
  • 205
Loading
added 77 characters in body
Source Link
kelalaka
  • 49.5k
  • 12
  • 118
  • 205
Loading
Source Link
kelalaka
  • 49.5k
  • 12
  • 118
  • 205
Loading