I am not a cryptoanalyst but books on the subject typically assert that an N bit hash is superior to the concatenation of n-bit and m-bit hashes where n + m = N. I will try to look up more info later...
Update: Slightly misunderstood OP (but hey, length is just a weak hash digest anyway right!). There is a lovely example involving PostScript files which display distinct letters when viewed or printed but have same md5sum and same length.
More generally, here is a paper that proves the claim that concatenation of "different" hash digests will not increase security over a single hash digest of length equal to the concatenated length.
Jonathan J. Hoch and Adi Shamir, Breaking the ICE - Finding Multicollisions in Iterated Concatenated and Expanded (ICE) Hash Functions, proc. FSE 2006
Good Day,
Dean
In reply to Re: (OT)Speculation: 128-bit digest + 64-bit length (192-bits) is more reliable and unique than a 256-digest alone.
by duelafn
in thread (OT)Speculation: 128-bit digest + 64-bit length (192-bits) is more reliable and unique than a 256-digest alone.
by BrowserUk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |