Re: MD5 is 1=>1?

[Roger Bryner <bryner@atlas.chem.utah.edu>]

On Tue, 5 Jul 1994, Derek Atkins wrote:
>Roger:
> > I would recomend replacing that option or discarding it, that is unless 
> > hash functions never throw away bits in sizes smaller than their output size.
> > (again, that was my question)
> 
> They shouldn't.  I refer back to my last statement, that if they did,
> it would make breaking the hash much easier.

This refers to the secure drive 1024 iterations of MD5.  Without a proof 
that md5(128bit number) is a one to one transformation, my statement 
about looseing entropy is possibly.  I don't think that it has been 
demonstrated that md5^1024 is more secure than md5.

NOBODY HAS IMPLIED THAT SUCH A PROOF, or equivilent proof, exists.

Roger.