Menu
I believe I can download the code to PHP or Linux or whatever and look directly at the source code for the MD5 function. Could I not then reverse engineer the encryption?
Here's the code - http://dollar.ecom.cmu.edu/sec/cryptosource.htm
It seems like any encryption method would be useless if "the enemy" has the code it was created with. Am I wrong?
374
A major concern with MD5 is the potential it has for message collisions when message hash codes are inadvertently duplicated. MD5 hash code strings also are limited to 128 bits. This makes them easier to breach than other hash code algorithms that followed.
Unfortunately, MD5 has been cryptographically broken and considered insecure. For this reason, it should not be used for anything. Instead, developers should switch to the Secure Hash Algorithm or a Symmetric Cryptographic Algorithm.
The MD5 cryptographic algorithm is not reversible i.e. We cannot decrypt a hash value created by the MD5 to get the input back to its original value. So there is no way to decrypt an MD5 password.
MD5 is considered weak and insecure; an attacker can easily use an MD5 collision to forge valid digital certificates. The most well-known example of this type of attack is when attackers forged a Microsoft Windows code-signing certificate and used it to sign the Flame malware.
That is actually a good question.
MD5 is a hash function -- it "mixes" input data in such a way that it should be unfeasible to do a number of things, including recovering the input given the output (it is not encryption, there is no key and it is not meant to be inverted -- rather the opposite). A handwaving description is that each input bit is injected several times in a large enough internal state, which is mixed such that any difference quickly propagates to the whole state.
MD5 is public since 1992. There is no secret, and has never been any secret, to the design of MD5.
MD5 is considered cryptographically broken since 2004, year of publication of the first collision (two distinct input messages which yield the same output); it was considered "weak" since 1996 (when some structural properties were found, which were believed to ultimately help in building collisions). However, there are other hash functions, which are as public as MD5 is, and for which no weakness is known yet: the SHA-2 family. Newer hash functions are currently being evaluated as part of the SHA-3 competition.
The really troubling part is that there is no known mathematical proof that a hash function may actually exist. A hash function is a publicly described efficient algorithm, which can be embedded as a logic circuit of a finite, fixed and small size. For the practitioners of computational complexity, it is somewhat surprising that it is possible to exhibit a circuit which cannot be inverted. So right now we only have candidates: functions for which nobody has found weaknesses yet, rather than function for which no weakness exists. On the other hand, the case of MD5 shows that, apparently, getting from known structural weaknesses to actual collisions to attacks takes a substantial amount of time (weaknesses in 1996, collisions in 2004, applied collisions -- to a pair of X.509 certificates -- in 2008), so the current trend is to use algorithm agility: when we use a hash function in a protocol, we also think about how we could transition to another, should the hash function prove to be weak.
134
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With
