MD5 Message Digest question

On 2004-12-18, Lawrence D¹Oliveiro wrote:
> In article <cotr0e$4ri$2@news.dialog.net.pl>,
> "Stachu 'Dozzie' K." <dozzie@dynamit.im.pwr.wroc.pl.nospam> wrote:
>
>>On 2004-12-04, Lawrence D”Oliveiro wrote:
>>> In article <coq6c2$hrn$1@zcars0v6.ca.nortel.com>,
>>> "Kian Goh" <kiangoh2700544@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I understand that the MD5 Message Digest algorithm takes as input a message
>>>>of arbitrary length and produces as output a 128-bit ``fingerprint'' or
>>>>``message digest'' of the input.
>>>
>>> Nobody should be using MD5 or SHA-1 for any new development. Think of
>>> them as supported only for backward-compatibility purposes. For new
>>> development, I'd suggest something like RIPE-MD160.
>>
>>Why? Because of recent collisions? AFAIR for RIPE-MD160 there were
>>collisions found, too. And I can't recall if there were found collisions
>>for SHA-1, not for SHA-0. Can you give me a link? Google says nothing
>>about to me.
>
><http://news.com.com/Crypto+researche...00-1002_3-5313
> 655.html> mentions significant weaknesses in MD5 as well as flaws in
> both SHA and SHA-1.

In SHA-1 there is only a potential weakness for now, though it is
disturbing.

> I'm not aware of any equivalent weaknesses found in RIPE-MD160. Can you
> give a reference for these?

OK, I've made a mistake. It wasn't RIPE-MD160, but RIPE-MD. The paper is
the first link in text you've pointed to:
http://eprint.iacr.org/2004/199.pdf

--
Stanislaw Klekot