Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 788027
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 14, 20262026-05-14T21:17:48+00:00 2026-05-14T21:17:48+00:00

Toying with an idea for a F2F networked application I’ve just been reading up

  • 0

Toying with an idea for a F2F networked application I’ve just been reading up on secure communication.
I quickly settled with the idea of using TLS / SSL as the basis for any communication since it employs Public Key encryption at the protocol level and thus is perfect for my needs.
However I was surprised to read (on wikipedia) that the newest version of TLS, SSLv3 uses a mix of MD5 and SHA-1 “because if any vulnerability was found in one of these algorithms the other would prevent it from compromising SSLv3”. However, as I take it, lately both have been found flawed !

So my questions are thus:
Does this not mean that SSLv3 is basically flawed, or am I not reading close enough ?
And if so does a “secure” alternative to SSLv3 exist ?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-14T21:17:49+00:00Added an answer on May 14, 2026 at 9:17 pm

    The PRF used in TLSv1 and all earlier SSL versions does use an xor of MD5 and SHA1. Collisions against both hash algorithms are possible. MD5 collisions are much easier to generate. From wikipedia 2^24 MD5 vs 2^63 SHA1 operations. In TLSv2 the PRF rather than being hardcoded can now be negotiated in much the same way as underlying ciphers in earlier versions of SSL. The initial must implement for TLSv2 is unmixed SHA2.

    However just because a hash is vulnerable to collisions does not necessarily render it insecure for all applications.

    For example it is quite dangerous to use vulnerable hashes alone to verify the signature of a file because it is very feasable to alter the data in a way that maintains the original signature. (By finding a collision)

    In the case of the PRF (Pseudo random function) what you want to do is provide predictable output based on the knowledge of a secret that cannot be feasibly reverse engineered to obtain the input secret. In this case successful search for collisions is not as useful as in the previous case.

    Finding collisions should still be concerning to any use of a hash algorithm as history has shown it can open doors to FUTURE discovery of much more significant vulnerabilities.

    Personally what is most alarming about TLS to me is the previous case where MD5/SHA1 is commonly used for signature verification when checking the trust chain between root and intermediary certificates. Forging of intermediaries by generating collisions has been successfully demonstrated.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I've been toying with the idea of adding IronPython for extending a scientific application
I've been toying with the idea of building a web-based Roguelike game using Silverlight
I'm writing a new asp.net mvc application and I've been toying with the idea
I'm toying with the idea of using RPC ( remote procedure calls ) on
I have written a series of functions, but have been toying with the idea
I've been toying with the idea of representing RESTful web APIs (e.g. CouchDB, Twitter)
I'm toying with the idea of embarking on a cloud-based client/server spare-time project using
I've been toying with the idea for a couple of days, but I can't
I've been toying with an interesting idea (No idea if I'll include it in
I love the idea of image-based languages, and lately I've been toying with Common

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.