Hash function security summary

This article summarizes publicly known attacks against cryptographic hash functions. Note that not all entries may be up to date. For a summary of other hash function parameters, see comparison of cryptographic hash functions.

Table color key
  No attack successfully demonstrated — attack only breaks a reduced version of the hash or requires more work than the claimed security level of the hash
  Attack demonstrated in theory — attack breaks all rounds and has lower complexity than security claim
  Attack demonstrated in practice

Common hash functions

Collision resistance
Main article: Collision attack
Hash function Security claim Best attack Publish date Comment
MD5 264 218 time 2013-03-25 This attack takes seconds on a regular PC. Two-block collisions in 218, single-block collisions in 241.[1]
SHA-1 280 261.2 2020-01-08 Paper by Gaëtan Leurent and Thomas Peyrin[2]
SHA256 2128 31 of 64 rounds (265.5) 2013-05-28 Two-block collision.[3]
SHA512 2256 24 of 80 rounds (232.5) 2008-11-25 Paper.[4]
SHA-3 Up to 2512 6 of 24 rounds (250) 2017 Paper.[5]
BLAKE2s 2128 2.5 of 10 rounds (2112) 2009-05-26 Paper.[6]
BLAKE2b 2256 2.5 of 12 rounds (2224) 2009-05-26 Paper.[6]

Chosen prefix collision attack
Hash function Security claim Best attack Publish date Comment
MD5 264 239 2009-06-16 This attack takes hours on a regular PC.[7]
SHA-1 280 263.4 2020-01-08 Paper by Gaëtan Leurent and Thomas Peyrin[2]
SHA256 2128
SHA512 2256
SHA-3 Up to 2512
BLAKE2s 2128
BLAKE2b 2256

Preimage resistance
Main article: Preimage attack
Hash function Security claim Best attack Publish date Comment
MD5 2128 2123.4 2009-04-27 Paper.[8]
SHA-1 2160 45 of 80 rounds 2008-08-17 Paper.[9]
SHA256 2256 43 of 64 rounds (2254.9 time, 26 memory) 2009-12-10 Paper.[10]
SHA512 2512 46 of 80 rounds (2511.5 time, 26 memory) 2008-11-25 Paper,[11] updated version.[10]
SHA-3 Up to 2512
BLAKE2s 2256 2.5 of 10 rounds (2241) 2009-05-26 Paper.[6]
BLAKE2b 2256 2.5 of 12 rounds (2481) 2009-05-26 Paper.[6]

Less-common hash functions

Collision resistance
Hash function Security claim Best attack Publish date Comment
GOST 2128 2105 2008-08-18 Paper.[12]
HAVAL-128 264 27 2004-08-17 Collisions originally reported in 2004,[13] followed up by cryptanalysis paper in 2005.[14]
MD2 264 263.3 time, 252 memory 2009 Slightly less computationally expensive than a birthday attack,[15] but for practical purposes, memory requirements make it more expensive.
MD4 264 3 operations 2007-03-22 Finding collisions almost as fast as verifying them.[16]
PANAMA 2128 26 2007-04-04 Paper,[17] improvement of an earlier theoretical attack from 2001.[18]
RIPEMD (original) 264 218 time 2004-08-17 Collisions originally reported in 2004,[13] followed up by cryptanalysis paper in 2005.[19]
RadioGatún Up to 2608[20] 2704 2008-12-04 For a word size w between 1-64 bits, the hash provides a security claim of 29.5w. The attack can find a collision in 211w time.[21]
RIPEMD-160 280 48 of 80 rounds (251 time) 2006 Paper.[22]
SHA-0 280 233.6 time 2008-02-11 Two-block collisions using boomerang attack. Attack takes estimated 1 hour on an average PC.[23]
Streebog 2256 9.5 rounds of 12 (2176 time, 2128 memory) 2013-09-10 Rebound attack.[24]
Whirlpool 2256 4.5 of 10 rounds (2120 time) 2009-02-24 Rebound attack.[25]

Preimage resistance
Hash function Security claim Best attack Publish date Comment
GOST 2256 2192 2008-08-18 Paper.[12]
MD2 2128 273 time, 273 memory 2008 Paper.[26]
MD4 2128 2102 time, 233 memory 2008-02-10 Paper.[27]
RIPEMD (original) 2128 35 of 48 rounds 2011 Paper.[28]
RIPEMD-128 2128 35 of 64 rounds
RIPEMD-160 2160 31 of 80 rounds
Streebog 2512 2266 time, 2259 data 2014-08-29 The paper presents two second-preimage attacks with variable data requirements.[29]
Tiger 2192 2188.8 time, 28 memory 2010-12-06 Paper.[30]

See also

References
  1. Tao Xie; Fanbao Liu; Dengguo Feng (25 March 2013). "Fast Collision Attack on MD5". Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  2. Gaëtan Leurent; Thomas Peyrin (2020-01-08). "SHA-1 is a Shambles: First Chosen-Prefix Collision on SHA-1 and Application to the PGP Web of Trust" (PDF). Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  3. Florian Mendel; Tomislav Nad; Martin Schläffer (2013-05-28). Improving Local Collisions: New Attacks on Reduced SHA-256. Eurocrypt 2013.
  4. Somitra Kumar Sanadhya; Palash Sarkar (2008-11-25). New Collision Attacks against Up to 24-Step SHA-2. Indocrypt 2008. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-89754-5_8.
  5. L. Song, G. Liao and J. Guo, Non-Full Sbox Linearization: Applications to Collision Attacks on Round-Reduced Keccak, CRYPTO, 2017
  6. LI Ji; XU Liangyu (2009-05-26). "Attacks on Round-Reduced BLAKE". Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  7. Marc Stevens; Arjen Lenstra; Benne de Weger (2009-06-16). "Chosen-prefix Collisions for MD5 and Applications" (PDF). Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  8. Yu Sasaki; Kazumaro Aoki (2009-04-27). Finding Preimages in Full MD5 Faster Than Exhaustive Search. Eurocrypt 2009. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-01001-9_8.
  9. Christophe De Cannière; Christian Rechberger (2008-08-17). Preimages for Reduced SHA-0 and SHA-1. Crypto 2008.
  10. Kazumaro Aoki; Jian Guo; Krystian Matusiewicz; Yu Sasaki; Lei Wang (2009-12-10). Preimages for Step-Reduced SHA-2. Asiacrypt 2009. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-10366-7_34.
  11. Yu Sasaki; Lei Wang; Kazumaro Aoki (2008-11-25). "Preimage Attacks on 41-Step SHA-256 and 46-Step SHA-512". Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  12. Florian Mendel; Norbert Pramstaller; Christian Rechberger; Marcin Kontak; Janusz Szmidt (2008-08-18). Cryptanalysis of the GOST Hash Function. Crypto 2008.
  13. Xiaoyun Wang; Dengguo Feng; Xuejia Lai; Hongbo Yu (2004-08-17). "Collisions for Hash Functions MD4, MD5, HAVAL-128 and RIPEMD". Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  14. Xiaoyun Wang; Dengguo Feng; Xiuyuan Yu (October 2005). "An attack on hash function HAVAL-128" (PDF). Science in China Series F: Information Sciences. 48 (5): 545–556. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.506.9546. doi:10.1360/122004-107. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2017-08-09. Retrieved 2014-10-23.
  15. Lars R. Knudsen; John Erik Mathiassen; Frédéric Muller; Søren S. Thomsen (January 2010). "Cryptanalysis of MD2". Journal of Cryptology. 23 (1): 72–90. doi:10.1007/s00145-009-9054-1.
  16. Yu Sasaki; Yusuke Naito; Noboru Kunihiro; Kazuo Ohta (2007-03-22). "Improved Collision Attacks on MD4 and MD5". IEICE Transactions on Fundamentals of Electronics, Communications and Computer Sciences. E90-A (1): 36–47. doi:10.1093/ietfec/e90-a.1.36.
  17. Joan Daemen; Gilles Van Assche (2007-04-04). Producing Collisions for Panama, Instantaneously. FSE 2007.
  18. Vincent Rijmen; Bart Van Rompay; Bart Preneel; Joos Vandewalle (2001). Producing Collisions for PANAMA. FSE 2001.
  19. Xiaoyun Wang; Xuejia Lai; Dengguo Feng; Hui Chen; Xiuyuan Yu (2005-05-23). Cryptanalysis of the Hash Functions MD4 and RIPEMD. Eurocrypt 2005. doi:10.1007/11426639_1.
  20. RadioGatún is a family of 64 different hash functions. The security level and best attack in the chart are for the 64-bit version. The 32-bit version of RadioGatún has a claimed security level of 2304 and the best claimed attack takes 2352 work.
  21. Thomas Fuhr; Thomas Peyrin (2008-12-04). Cryptanalysis of RadioGatun. FSE 2009.
  22. Florian Mendel; Norbert Pramstaller; Christian Rechberger; Vincent Rijmen (2006). On the Collision Resistance of RIPEMD-160. ISC 2006.
  23. Stéphane Manuel; Thomas Peyrin (2008-02-11). Collisions on SHA-0 in One Hour. FSE 2008. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-71039-4_2.
  24. Zongyue Wang; Hongbo Yu; Xiaoyun Wang (2013-09-10). "Cryptanalysis of GOST R hash function". Information Processing Letters. 114 (12): 655–662. doi:10.1016/j.ipl.2014.07.007.
  25. Florian Mendel; Christian Rechberger; Martin Schläffer; Søren S. Thomsen (2009-02-24). The Rebound Attack: Cryptanalysis of Reduced Whirlpool and Grøstl (PDF). FSE 2009.
  26. Søren S. Thomsen (2008). "An improved preimage attack on MD2". Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  27. Gaëtan Leurent (2008-02-10). MD4 is Not One-Way (PDF). FSE 2008.
  28. Chiaki Ohtahara; Yu Sasaki; Takeshi Shimoyama (2011). Preimage Attacks on Step-Reduced RIPEMD-128 and RIPEMD-160. ISC 2011. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21518-6_13.
  29. Jian Guo; Jérémy Jean; Gaëtan Leurent; Thomas Peyrin; Lei Wang (2014-08-29). The Usage of Counter Revisited: Second-Preimage Attack on New Russian Standardized Hash Function. SAC 2014.
  30. Jian Guo; San Ling; Christian Rechberger; Huaxiong Wang (2010-12-06). Advanced Meet-in-the-Middle Preimage Attacks: First Results on Full Tiger, and Improved Results on MD4 and SHA-2. Asiacrypt 2010. pp. 12–17.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.