Re: [Gnumed-devel] GNotary

[Ian Haywood]

Karsten Hilbert wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 04:53:42AM +1000, Tim Churches wrote:
> 
> 
>>>The hash is not md5 nut sha256 and ripmd160. I hope this makes a 
>>>differences. 
>>>If not. Tough luck. 
>>
>>SHA256 is thought to be quite safe against both colision and pre-image
>>attacks for now.
> 
> The important part in this remark is "for now" and not
> "quite safe".
> 
> Any hash is liable to be successfully attacked eventually
> (is there an equivalent to one-time pads in "hash space" ?).
Yeah, the original document. ;-)

No point signing it: a signature involves a hash.
The notary would be equivalent to a networked backup service.
(which is of itself useful) Internet in Australia is too primitive
for this to be commerically possible, should be feasible in DE though.

Ian