I'm trying to understand the following text:

Here is the related material:

I'm having trouble understanding why $m$ and $m'$ both hash to $H_2$. I tried doing truth tables for $m_1'$ and $m_2'$ given the equations but I don't seem to be getting anywhere with them.

Is it also possible to justify that claim with high probability that $m \neq m'$?

  • "you can verify this in the exercises at the end of this chapter" ... did you try and perform the exercises? Have you tried simply substituting $m_i$ with $m_i'$ in the AES based function given? – Maarten Bodewes Oct 14 at 22:25
  • which book? did you look for errata? The exercise is same? – kelalaka Oct 14 at 22:42
  • @kelalaka Yes, the book is Crpytography Engineering: Design Principles and Practical Applications. – Miraclefruit Oct 14 at 22:47
  • @MaartenBodewes I did try as I mentioned below the picture. If I substitute mi with mi' then I would get H2 = AESk(H1 XOR m2') correct? – Miraclefruit Oct 14 at 22:48
up vote 2 down vote accepted

OK, lets go through this step by step:


$H_1 = E(m_1)$

$H_2 = E(E(m_1) \oplus m_2)$


$H_1' = E(m_2 \oplus E(m_1))$ because $m_1' = m_2 \oplus E(m_1)$

$H_2' = E(H_1' \oplus H_2 \oplus m_2 \oplus H_1)$ because $m_2' = H_1' \oplus H_2 \oplus m_2 \oplus H_1$

then substitute $H_1'$ in $H_2'$:

$H_2' = E(E(m_2 \oplus E(m_1)) \oplus H_2 \oplus m_2 \oplus H_1)$

then substitute $H_2$:

$H_2' = E(E(m_2 \oplus E(m_1)) \oplus E(E(m_1) \oplus m_2) \oplus m_2 \oplus H_1)$

and $H_1$:

$H_2' = E(E(m_2 \oplus E(m_1)) \oplus E(E(m_1) \oplus m_2) \oplus m_2 \oplus E(m_1))$

re-arrange the parameters of XOR:

$H_2' = E(E(E(m_1) \oplus m_2) \oplus E(E(m_1) \oplus m_2) \oplus E(m_1) \oplus m_2)$

now we can see that two parts can be stricken out:

$H_2' = E( \require{cancel}\cancel{E(E(m_1) \oplus m_2) \oplus E(E(m_1) \oplus m_2)} \oplus E(m_1) \oplus m_2)$

so we are left with:

$H_2' = E(E(m_1) \oplus m_2)$

meaning that $H_2' = H_2$.

Given that $m_1'$ and $m_2'$ are unlikely to be equal to $m_1$ and $m_2$ we can clearly see that many pairs of related, but different messages hash to the same result, creating collisions.

Here $E$ is of course the AES function.

  • I was definitely going about this the wrong way. This is clear, thank you! – Miraclefruit Oct 15 at 15:18

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.