惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

C
Check Point Blog
IT之家
IT之家
V
Visual Studio Blog
The Cloudflare Blog
博客园 - 司徒正美
Jina AI
Jina AI
博客园_首页
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志
美团技术团队
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
博客园 - 聂微东
人人都是产品经理
人人都是产品经理
T
Tailwind CSS Blog
罗磊的独立博客
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
量子位
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
博客园 - 【当耐特】
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
爱范儿
爱范儿
博客园 - Franky
Last Week in AI
Last Week in AI
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知

cs.CR updates on arXiv.org

Agentic Vulnerability Reasoning on Windows COM Binaries From Beats to Breaches:How Offensive AI Infers Sensitive User Information from Playlists Undetectable Backdoors in Model Parameters: Hiding Sparse Secrets in High Dimensions When Embedding-Based Defenses Fail: Rethinking Safety in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems Token-Efficient Change Detection in LLM APIs Selfie-Capture Dynamics as an Auxiliary Signal Against Deepfakes and Injection Attacks for Mobile Identity Verification Trident: Improving Malware Detection with LLMs and Behavioral Features When Alignment Isn't Enough: Response-Path Attacks on LLM Agents RefusalGuard: Geometry-Preserving Fine-Tuning for Safety in LLMs Checkerboard: A Simple, Effective, Efficient and Learning-free Clean Label Backdoor Attack with Low Poisoning Budget Block-wise Codeword Embedding for Reliable Multi-bit Text Watermarking Secret Stealing Attacks on Local LLM Fine-Tuning through Supply-Chain Model Code Backdoors Enhancing Linux Privilege Escalation Attack Capabilities of Local LLM Agents Defusing the Trigger: Plug-and-Play Defense for Backdoored LLMs via Tail-Risk Intrinsic Geometric Smoothing Evaluating Jailbreaking Vulnerabilities in LLMs Deployed as Assistants for Smart Grid Operations: A Benchmark Against NERC Standards Behavioral Canaries: Auditing Private Retrieved Context Usage in RL Fine-Tuning FlexServe: A Fast and Secure LLM Serving System for Mobile Devices with Flexible Resource Isolation Breaking MCP with Function Hijacking Attacks: Novel Threats for Function Calling and Agentic Models Text Steganography with Dynamic Codebook and Multimodal Large Language Model An AI Agent Execution Environment to Safeguard User Data TwoHamsters: Benchmarking Multi-Concept Compositional Unsafety in Text-to-Image Models Fundamental Limitations of Favorable Privacy-Utility Guarantees for DP-SGD Symbolic Guardrails for Domain-Specific Agents: Stronger Safety and Security Guarantees Without Sacrificing Utility Hardening x402: PII-Safe Agentic Payments via Pre-Execution Metadata Filtering QShield: Securing Neural Networks Against Adversarial Attacks using Quantum Circuits Hijacking Text Heritage: Hiding the Human Signature through Homoglyphic Substitution Like a Hammer, It Can Build, It Can Break: Large Language Model Uses, Perceptions, and Adoption in Cybersecurity Operations on Reddit Private Seeds, Public LLMs: Realistic and Privacy-Preserving Synthetic Data Generation One Word at a Time: Incremental Completion Decomposition Breaks LLM Safety Measuring and Exploiting Contextual Bias in LLM-Assisted Security Code Review
Inverting Cryptographic Hash Functions via Cube-and-Conquer
Oleg Zaikin · 2022-12-06 · via cs.CR updates on arXiv.org

MD4 and MD5 are fundamental cryptographic hash functions proposed in the early 1990s. MD4 consists of 48 steps and produces a 128-bit hash given a message of arbitrary finite size. MD5 is a more secure 64-step extension of MD4. Both MD4 and MD5 are vulnerable to practical collision attacks, yet it is still not realistic to invert them, i.e., to find a message given a hash. In 2007, the 39-step version of MD4 was inverted by reducing to SAT and applying a CDCL solver along with the so-called Dobbertin's constraints. As for MD5, in 2012 its 28-step version was inverted via a CDCL solver for one specified hash without adding any extra constraints. In this study, Cube-and-Conquer (a combination of CDCL and lookahead) is applied to invert step-reduced versions of MD4 and MD5. For this purpose, two algorithms are proposed. The first one generates inverse problems for MD4 by gradually modifying the Dobbertin's constraints. The second algorithm tries the cubing phase of Cube-and-Conquer with different cutoff thresholds to find the one with the minimum runtime estimate of the conquer phase. This algorithm operates in two modes: (i) estimating the hardness of a given propositional Boolean formula; (ii) incomplete SAT solving of a given satisfiable propositional Boolean formula. While the first algorithm is focused on inverting step-reduced MD4, the second one is not area-specific and is therefore applicable to a variety of classes of hard SAT instances. In this study, 40-, 41-, 42-, and 43-step MD4 are inverted for the first time via the first algorithm and the estimating mode of the second algorithm. Also, 28-step MD5 is inverted for four hashes via the incomplete SAT solving mode of the second algorithm. For three hashes out of them, it is done for the first time.