« Sharing Sources Across Virtual Machines | Main | Anniversary Weekend »
January 20, 2007
ec06b3461cf0eaf3d3e4d7a2e429bddb
Today's blog post is very interesting, but unfortunately, publishing it now would cause serious harm. On the other hand, at some point in the future I would like to be able to prove that I wrote it today. So, let me just say that its MD5 hash is
ec06b3461cf0eaf3d3e4d7a2e429bddb:-).
Posted by roc at January 20, 2007 5:24 PM
Comments
You might want to specify the character encoding. :-)
Posted by: David Baron at January 20, 2007 6:50 PM
ASCII. You can start your dictionary engine now :-)
Posted by: Robert O'Callahan at January 20, 2007 7:15 PM
Oh man hilarious.
Posted by: Justin Watt at January 20, 2007 7:17 PM
You could at least give a hint about *when* we might see said post...
Posted by: Ron at January 20, 2007 8:18 PM
You tease you.
- Colin
Posted by: Colin Coghill at January 20, 2007 9:57 PM
Given the recent attack on MD5, couldn't you now be accused of having constructed two different messages which each would have that same hash, so that you can publish whichever one will turn out to be more appropriate at that future date? :)
(I assume this won't actually be a problem, due to your post not being a prediction as much as containing some sensitive business information or something. And at the very least it should still server as proof that you wrote it now. Still - might want to post the SHA-1 hash as well.) ;)
Posted by: Sander at January 21, 2007 12:48 AM
There's *always* a chance that you could find a way to write an article with a collision with this md5sum. How about being a good man and posting a SHA1 for us? :-)
Posted by: Mark El-Wakil at January 21, 2007 7:59 AM
Gee, thanks for sharing.
Posted by: RyanVM at January 21, 2007 11:09 AM
SHA-1 has been cracked too, y'know. I think it's down to 2^63 from 2^80. Same Chinese woman who did MD5 did it.
Actually, posting the SHA-1 would be a bad idea -- two possible vectors for attack, and you can cross reference them.
Posted by: Colin Barrett at January 21, 2007 6:23 PM
Colin: getting the message from the hashes is as impossible as ever. And (afaiui) constructing two messages that have _both_ the same MD5 and SHA-1 hash is far and far harder than constructing a message that has only one of the hashes in common.
Posted by: Sander at January 21, 2007 11:12 PM
Well, this was fairly easy to figure out.
$ echo "Soylent Green is people\!" > foo
$ md5 foo
MD5 (foo) = ec06b3461cf0eaf3d3e4d7a2e429bddb
Posted by: Justin Dolske at January 22, 2007 4:23 PM
I get cc0772acb9b11fe9e8369c8ea3b67c20. MoCo better get you some new hardware...
Posted by: Robert O'Callahan at January 22, 2007 8:47 PM
Aha, so you are the one who submitted the scary Vista Security (Bug) Report I've heard so much rumor about today. Stunning find.
Posted by: Bob at January 23, 2007 4:15 PM
Is today the day you can publish the post? I mean, hex numbers seem all the rage at the moment...
(Not that I can make todays magic number turn into your md5 hash...)
Posted by: Edouard at May 2, 2007 7:02 PM