Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:33884 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 36667 invoked by uid 1010); 9 Dec 2007 17:52:05 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 36652 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2007 17:52:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 9 Dec 2007 17:52:05 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=solar@openwall.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=solar@openwall.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain openwall.com designates 195.42.179.200 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: solar@openwall.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 195.42.179.200 mother.openwall.net Received: from [195.42.179.200] ([195.42.179.200:4338] helo=mother.openwall.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id B9/DA-51375-24B2C574 for ; Sun, 09 Dec 2007 12:52:04 -0500 Received: (qmail 22262 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2007 17:51:59 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO pvt.openwall.com) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 9 Dec 2007 17:51:59 -0000 Received: by pvt.openwall.com (Postfix, from userid 503) id 9F3CB2FD0E; Sun, 9 Dec 2007 20:49:02 +0300 (MSK) Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2007 20:49:02 +0300 To: Peter Brodersen Cc: internals@lists.php.net Message-ID: <20071209174902.GA14620@openwall.com> References: <20071209010552.GA12561@openwall.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Subject: Re: faster & public domain MD5 implementation From: solar@openwall.com (Solar Designer) On Sun, Dec 09, 2007 at 12:53:56PM +0100, Peter Brodersen wrote: > A bit on a side note regarding the php function md5(): In general it > is possible to supply an arbitrary number of bits as input to MD5. > However, the implementation of md5() only takes a sting with octets as > the smallest fragments. > > Would it somehow be possible to supply an input where the number of > bits does not add up to a number divisible by eight? Or is this > feature of md5 simply not relevant to anybody? I don't think there's any demand for this. Even the reference implementation only works on whole octets, so there are no protocol specs or anything (that I am aware of) that would require computation of MD5 on a bitstream of arbitrary length. Alexander