Aussie Speed Cameras in Doubt Because of MD5 1004
An anonymous reader writes "A speeding case has been thrown out in Australia after the Roads and Traffic Authority admitted that it could not prove the integrity of speed-camera photos. 'The case revolved around the integrity of a mathematical MD5 algorithm published on each picture and used as a security measure to prove pictures have not been doctored after they have been taken.'" I wonder if Australian police are as (radar gun) trigger happy as they are in certain parts of the U.S.
Fun.. (Score:2, Interesting)
Good luck... (Score:2, Interesting)
American traffic magistrates (at least in WA) would not even understand what an "algorithm" is. They will just see another glib speeder trying to scam the county out of $162.
(Warning for visitors: WA has one of the most zealous state highway patrol forces in the nation. Just don't exceed 10 over the limit here.)
Re:Good luck... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Good luck... (Score:4, Insightful)
Well then, if "as fast as he wants" means "much faster than the law allows", then I hope physics brings him some swift justice before he kills some innocent person who is not a complete ass.
Re:Good luck... (Score:4, Interesting)
Also, on a well-maintained highway, at a time when there is little or no other traffic, with a good driver and a well maintained vehicle, the fact that a person is driving 85 in a 55 does not necessarily mean that he is presenting an unreasonable risk to himself or others.
Re:Good luck... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Good luck... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Good luck... (Score:4, Funny)
Yes, please.. at least 69.34% of us are simply deathly sick and tired of it.
Re:Good luck... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good luck... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, that reminds me of something I witnessed about 25 years ago when I was a child. On a freeway a car flew past us at high speed, minutes later we drove past to see it, upside down, with a front type blown open and bloody bodies on the ground around it. I'll never forget that.
The World is full of people who are "better than average" in their own minds. Especially young people who think they are the next F1 champion. A while ago on TV in Australia, a current affairs type program got a bunch of hoons together to do a high performance driver training and testing. They all failed because they ALL went out too hard with something to prove. The funniest thing, was that the old guy training them, drove their own hotted up cars around the course much better and faster than the owners did.
Re:Good luck... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Good luck... (Score:4, Interesting)
The point was that he was driving THEIR cars better than they were and showing that they were nowhere near as good as they thought they were. You can't keep a car driving near its limits if you don't know the car well. Yet this old guy drove their cars much better than they did. They didn't respect this guy at first because he was old and saddly after proving these young idiots wrong, they were still fast talking and making excuses.
Of course I expect the old driving instructor to be much better than them. What was funny was that this old guy who the young hoons would not identify with as being a fast driver, handed them their asses in their own boy racer cars. As far as old racing drivers go, the instructor did not look the part either. Imagine you're an 18yo with some crazy hotted up 600kW Supra and your grandfather, who normally drives the speed limit in his Volvo, shows you how to drive it hard.
These hoons were humiliated. The point of the show was a challenge to the hoons to prove that they were good enough drivers to speed. They all failed.
Re:Good luck... (Score:5, Insightful)
"These hoons were humiliated. The point of the show was a challenge to the hoons to prove that they were good enough drivers to speed. They all failed."
Dead on, but even after all that some of them still could not see a problem with thier own speeding. They were male and had the "indestructable" attitude (I suffered the same syndrome 25 yrs ago and have the scars to prove it).
Off course we have vast highways over here where you can see a Camel 2km up the road, no traffic, no cops, no bends. Speeding is not a problem in the middle of nowhere, falling asleep and road-trains will kill you.
Speed limits are made so that the AVERAGE driver can make a stupid mistake once in a while and live to be honked at and humiliated. If EVERY driver is driving near thier skill limit then NOBODY can make a mistake, ever!
Re:Good luck... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good luck... (Score:4, Insightful)
That's a ridiculous question - dogs, cats, etc. are legally property. People are not. Of course I'd feel badly running over a cat or other cuddly animal, but if it's between that and losing control of the vehicle, causing perhaps thousands of dollars in damage or worse, injuring someone, the cat doesn't get a second thought at the moment. Certainly I avoid animals on the road where possible. However, the most important part of driving is judgement, and that means knowing when you just have to suck it up and barrel over someone's pet in the road for the greater good.
Re:Good luck... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Good luck... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Good luck... (Score:5, Insightful)
55(1980's speedlimit)
65(1990's)
75(current)
The road has been all of the above. Is 85 even that much of a stretch for a stable, well maintained car with good tires?
I've driven a number of vehicles, and there are a number that I wouldn't drive past 55-65 in on any road. It could be an immaculate runway and I wouldn't go that fast. On the other hand, I've driven a few sports-cars, and they feel more in control even going 30mph faster than the delivery truck.
Speed limits in theory and practice (Score:3, Interesting)
It helps that the police don't enforce the limit too strictly; I drove 80mph past troopers chilling in speed traps many times, and they just didn't care. I hope they are waiting for the assholes that tailgate and weave at 110mph.
Re:Good luck... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, but on a four lane highway, where the most severe turn is about 30 degrees per mile, which is the 'unsafe speed'?
The answer is: any speed other than the one all the other vehicles are moving at.
Numerous studies have shown that the most important factor in reducing the total number of accidents on highways is to get all of the vehicles moving at about the same speed. Driving the speed limit when everyone else is going 10 over is dangerous. Driving 10mph faster than everyone else is dangerous.
Higher absolute speed increases the severity of injuries in case of an accident, different roadways also impose a natural maximum (though the US Interstates were mostly designed for 80mph traffic, since the speed limit was 70mph when they were constructed), and weather conditions can change things dramatically, but the most important consideration in minimizing accidents is getting all of the cars moving at close to the same speed.
If you're the granny with cars whizzing by to the left and right, you're a hazard, even if you're going the speed limit. If you're the punk passing everyone and weaving through traffic, you're a hazard, even if your car is perfectly capable of handling the speed on that road. In both cases, it doesn't even matter how good of a driver you may or may not be... if your actions may surprise another driver, then you'll eventually cause an accident.
Re:Good luck... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Good luck... (Score:3, Insightful)
Did the Intrepid and the van have the same mass, the same center of gravity?
Re:Good luck... (Score:3, Interesting)
Hmmm, i've gotten very few traffic tickets in my life in washington... and there are areas that I make damn sure to speed +10mph over and +20mph over.
the first time I got a ticket was when I was younger and going really +85 in a 55, and got a ticket for going 10 over. I didn't argue that one. I got another ticket for going 10 over in a small town.... it was inbetween a
Re:Good luck... (Score:5, Funny)
WARNING! Police in Washington enforce laws!
Re:Good luck... (Score:3, Insightful)
Correction... (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally I have no problem with Police enforcing laws, it's just when they go for the easy, (relatively) harmless, money-grabbing ones to the detriment of rapes, murders, assault, criminal damage, etc. that I have a problem.
Yeah, the problem is pretty bad where I live, too. Cops whoring themselves out for speeding fines when more serious crimes go reported and with no police response for hours or days.
F*** them.
Re:Correction... (Score:3, Insightful)
Ok now, I hate traffic tickets as much as the next person, and think the way they're enforced is often all about revenue... but I would take issue with the claim that it's to the detriment of stopping other crimes... in fact, in alot of cities, one of the first things they do when
Re:Correction... (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't, and have never, lived in what you'd call a 'bad' neighborhood. And yet on three separate occasions, at three separate homes (one I was housesitting for a friend), I had some incredibly stupid burglars attempt to break in while I was home, and up, and the lights were on. On all three occasions I called 911 while the attempted break-in was in progress; two times the cops failed to respond because all available units were busy doing something else (what? cracking down on noise complaints? eating donuts?), and the third time they showed up TWO HOURS after the call. In all of these cases I ended up running off the crooks myself (once with hilarious results, when I scared the crap out of a would-be burglar and he charged straight into a woodpile).
Incidents like these tend to make me irritable. I can't get a cop when a break-in is happening right then and there, but the city seems to have plenty of money to pay for cops who...bust speeders. Yeah, got their priorities real straight, they do.
Perhaps I'd be somewhat mollified if the traffic cops went around handing out tickets to aging Boomers who drive their minivans/SUVs like they were tanks, or to those fucking idiots who talk on their cell phones while weaving back and forth across lanes/blasting through stop signs/etc., but these people seem to get a free pass....
Max
Re:Correction... (Score:4, Funny)
If there's no response, just call them back and tell them not to bother because you've just shot the burglar. Bet you a box of donuts there'll be cops screeching to a halt outside your house within five minutes...
Re:Correction... (Score:5, Interesting)
It probably wouldn't bother me so much if they would take those officers running speed traps and put them someplace genuinely useful, like busy intersections where people die all the time because asshats are always running the stop lights.
Re:The F State (Score:3, Interesting)
No, that's not quite how self-defense law works down here, and the sheriff's office most definitely could prosecute the assailant for firing into an occupied vehicle, discharging a firearm within city limits, and a host of other offenses. They did have an eyewitness to the shooting, plus there is going to be evidence inside the vehicle that a firearm was discharged.
I also like the comment "so long as America keeps
Sorry, I live in Hollywood (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Good luck... (Score:3, Insightful)
Max
Why MD5 (Score:2)
I don't get why you'd just use MD5 -- then you'd doctor the photo and recompute the MD5 hash.
Re:Why MD5 (Score:5, Insightful)
Some info (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's assume this is the protocol:
- camera takes snap shot, uses signing key on tamper-resistant chip inside camera to sign a hash of that photo (with the time, speed, etc. concatenated onto the end of the photo before hashing)
- send bill to speeder (possibly including hash of picture or in some way "committing" to that particular md5sum)
Then, the problem the bad guy has is to find another picture with that same hash value. This is a preimage attack [find another photo that outputs this hash value] and the weaknesses in MD5 were collision weaknesses: particular collisions found and an algorithm for generating collisions. But collisions are just two messages that have the same hash value, not a particular hash value of your choosing.If the protocol doesn't have a way to securely associate a hash with a photo (e.g. doesn't sign it), then it doesn't make a difference if you're using MD5 or SHA-1 or SHA-256, the cops can still just doctor photos at will and only produce the hashes of the doctored photos. So this line of "attack" has nothing to do with underlying cryptographic weaknesses.
[Note also that the weaknesses in MD5 don't affect the security of HMAC-MD5]. Hell, the case should be thrown out since the defense atty had the temerity to issue this stunning (even in buzz-word-addled tech) mischaracterization: http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/motorist-wins
Re:Why MD5 (Score:3, Informative)
Don't speed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Don't speed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Don't speed (Score:3, Interesting)
Perhaps you should hang way back of the driver so that if he does anything unexpected you have a larger time to assess the risk and react.
Or when I'm in heavy traffic, and an ambulance comes up behind me and there's no clearance to pull to a different lane.
I recently saw this happen just yesterday! But it was a fire-truck. I did have enough room to move into the next lane, but the car behind me didn't. So the
I call bullshit (Score:3, Interesting)
Just two weeks ago I was first on the scene when a dickhead drove his BMW into a telephone poll. It was in a residential street street on a sharp corner and he was driving like it was the Le Manns. I was just about to walk down that street with some friends when a telephone call h
Re:Invasion of my privacy. (Score:3, Informative)
You sir, are a crack head. Your licence plate is publicly visible. The entire point of licence plates is to be publicly visible to everyone to uniquely identify your car. Your licence plate isn't private.
There are a lot of things wrong with traffic cameras, but privacy isn't one of them.
loophole? (Score:5, Insightful)
Many of those red light tickets were dismissed in the US for various reasons, some technical, some through loopholes, and some through plain old dishonesty in the ticket system operator. They had lowered the yellow light timing below legal standards to make more money. Outrageous if you ask me.
Law enforcement is supposed to be run by government employees, who have no axe to grind and nothing to gain by dishonesty. I like it like that.
Re:loophole? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:loophole? (Score:3, Interesting)
This is a catch-22. Nobody wants to be killed by a speeder, but nobody wants to pay to stop that from happening. The closest to a solution to this that the police departments have is to use cameras - they're cheap enough that they can afford them.
And when the police ARE funded to semi-reasonable levels, they get complaints
Re:loophole? (Score:5, Insightful)
You fix is "make the Federal huge huge huge", when the fix really is "slash the Federal, reduce overall costs", now the States and local government can get more revenue without the Federal taking it all. The Federal screwed up education, proved that social programs don't work (at least not at the Federal level), made the tax situation horrible, and a lot more.
It's very cute that you think it's proper to take money from the military to give it to social services and police. That will not only not work, but they don't have much to do with each other. They're handled on different levels of government, as they should be, and as they are supposed to be according to the Constitution.
Social services *should* be done on a more reasonable level of government, so that you aren't forced, against your will, to pay for them. Like the way it was done *before* FDR, when we weren't running trillions of dollars in Federal debt.
Also, the Federal don't do police. They have agencies of dubious value that are kind of similar to police, but aren't. Police are mostly a local government thing. If the Federal didn't take nearly all the money and then use it to control local government, this wouldn't be a problem. Additionally, police don't like doing speed traps; it sucks as a job. Of course, they don't set the speed limits - the municipality or State does - so they don't get to decide to set reasonable speeds. That fancy assed radar/laser gun isn't on the "desired new toy" list for most of them, either. They often prefer the older one because when your radar detector goes off, *you slow down*.
Education is local government, too. Once the Federal got involved it went to hell. Did you ever notice how the majority of school funding comes straight from local revenue into local government? That's because the Federal doesn't do it.
Emergency services are local/state government, with the exception of Federal agencies like FEMA. Most of the cost is not Federal, however. There is also some at the State level.
Science should properly be done outside the government. However, this is the first thing you mention that might be justifiable as something to be more heavily funded. I would prefer for science to be done in schools, by private individuals, and by private companies, but that just isn't happening anymore.
The lesson is keep your government local. Concentration of power is bad, and history agrees with me (as does the Constitution). Perhaps you noticed that as Federal power increased, personal freedom decreased? Cut most of the Federal and some of the States and you end up with a lot more services, a lot more freedom, and a lot more control over your government. Then you have adequate police and fire protection, well funded schools and libraries, and good condition roads.
People *are* willing to put in to the system. They just aren't willing to put into *your* system, and don't really like having their money confiscated to have things forced down their throats.
Re:loophole? (Score:4, Informative)
The people in office right now are Republicans in name only. Don't let their idiocy confuse you.
- A.P.
Re:loophole? (Score:3, Informative)
It also doesn't lack homelessness or drug abuse. Those are just better hidden by forcing those people elsewhere, out of travelled areas, or by arresting them and putting them in jail.
I don't believe you in the slightest about Congressmen sending their children
Re:I'd agree with you... (Score:3, Insightful)
But the military have lost on paper something like 16 billion dollars in the past 10 years. Some of that has been from abuse of DoD credit cards, some probably got swiped, some probably just got lost in the paper shuffle.
That's 1.6 Billion out of 400-500 billion(depending on how you figure it) discretionary spending? Translation:
And the waste is, in ma
This won't pass muster. (Score:2)
On the flip side, red-light cameras themselves are controversial simply because people don't like them. Here in san diego there was a huge row over them because some of the fines gathered went to Lockheed Martin (camera maker).
Personally, I just put those glass frames that make my license plate unreadable except from direct frontal view, and stay frosty.
Re:This won't pass muster. (Score:2)
Re:This won't pass muster. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:This won't pass muster. (Score:2)
Depends on the state (Score:4, Informative)
Anyway, we now have speed cameras on traffic light intersections and any random car parked on the side of the road *could* be a speed camera.
In Victoria (where Melbourne is), they are even more tough. As soon as I cross the border to Vic, I don't speed at all.
So the answer is "yes", they are very very trigger happy and in a lot of cases, there was no trigger, just an automated photo.
Re:Depends on the state (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Depends on the state (Score:2)
It's obvious that this isn't for saving lives but for revenue.
Re:Depends on the state (Score:2)
That said, I see a lot of danger in old and unreliable drivers who will most likely decrease their speed to absolutely make sure that they average out below the speed limit (most likely being 10 - 20 km/h below), which in turn may cause very dangerous situation due to frustration from the drivers behind them..
POMES (Score:3)
Just so you know it's pomes, as in Prisoners Of Mother England.
When expanding the acronymn to an Englishman you always get a reply "but hey you're the prisoners!", at which point it's customary to point out that they're still stuck there.
__Adult funny clips updated! [laughdaily.com]
Re:Depends on the state (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Depends on the state (Score:5, Insightful)
Supposedly, the power comes from the people. It's not that the state would take it's power away, rather, it would be that the people have not yet conceeded that authority to it in the first place (by voting for, or electing people who vote for laws granting the state that power).
My experiance with speed cameras (Score:5, Insightful)
Melbournians are subjected to hidden cameras looking over overtaking lanes. The cameras are privatised so people get paid more the more cars they catch. The situation there is terrible.
Queensland is somewhat better because police are required to have a sign out saying that there are speed cameras in use, however this sign is usually conveniently placed behind a bush or behind the car with the camera in it. Queensland is also better off because the police do not rely so heavily on the revenue that their cameras drum up, it seems at times the only thing paying for Melbournes police is speeding offiences.
One thing is certain, these cameras do not save any lives. I remember clearly once in high school a Policeman came to give a talk on vehicle safety he showed us a big graph with a stedily declining death rate over the years, he pointed out the huge drop after the introduction of seat bealts, then one after they banned drink driving, and a smaller drop after the introduction of airbags. My hand immediently shot up and I asked him when speed cameras were introduced, my teachers just laughed and he never answered the question.
Re:My experiance with speed cameras (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:My experiance with speed cameras (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes there is.
1. You've got a huge mac truck on your tail that wants to go faster and won't stop for your little toyota.
2. You've got a huge SUV on your tail that wants to go faster that won't stop for your little toyota
3. Your driving down a huge mountain and your brakes gave out because you were a dumb ass and thought it was a good idea to go exactly the speed limit.
Look, i'm not going to justifify going unsafe speeds... I've done it enough in my life but not going to touch that. No excuse for that.
I am going to touch bases on the fact that keeping with trafic flow results in less accidents. I tried going the speedlimit in many places, thinking I was doing my part for the enviroment and saftey... and I get rear ended by everyone and their neighbor... so I have a choice... either go a little bit faster and reduce the number of accidents I have, or continue blindly following the signs and get in the hospital... again.
BTW... going different speeds, accelerating and decelerating cause an unneccessary amount of exhost fumes... so do automatic transmitions. Going one consistant speed for as long as possible yields the best benifit in fuel consumotion and the least amount of fume production.
In my life as a driver, I have NEVER been in an accident going over the speed limit keeping with trafic flow and being a generally safe driver. I have gotten into accidents when going the speedlimit. And now SUVs are so very popular... i'm going to keep it safe and go with traffic flow... cause it saves lives.
Re:My experiance with speed cameras (Score:3, Insightful)
aboslutely right. cruise control is good. just set it on the top speed, and not only will you get better fuel consumtion, you will get less fines.
Re:My experiance with speed cameras (Score:3, Funny)
Re:My experiance with speed cameras (Score:3, Insightful)
speed is a measure of movement. Distance over time.
So are you suggesting we never move?
If not, how do you define when someone is "speeding"? 15kph, 50kph, 100kph (upper speed limit in NZ), 110kph (upper speed limit in AU), 130kph (upper speed limit in france during fine weather), 155mph (voluntary speed limit fitted to many cars in germany)
If driving 60kp
Re:My experiance with speed cameras (Score:3, Insightful)
Right. Do you have even the slightest shred of evidence that "exhaust fumes" play any part in the setting of speed limits ?
Re:My experiance with speed cameras (Score:5, Insightful)
Not necessarily. Different cars have different gearing ratios hence are more efficient at different speeds. For example if the optimum fuel-efficiency speed of my car is 65mph, and I am in a 30mph limit, then staying below the speed limit is causing an unnecessary amount of exhaust fumes and costing lives.
As for costing lives, I don't think we can claim that. Contributing factor to early deaths, trigger for various things such as asthma, maybe. More lives are probably cost by speed cameras. I've lost count of the number of cars I've seen drastically brake at the last minute when seeing a speed camera late, and either nearly swerve off the road or have the cars pile up into the back of them. People often instinctively brake just in case, even if they are not speeding. It is probably also a contributing factor to a number of deaths in that it's one thing people are looking for when driving when they should be concentrating on the road.
Phillip.
Re:My experiance with speed cameras (Score:3, Insightful)
Bogus physics here. The fuel efficiency depends on the engine RPM (where it has an optimum range)and the speed of the vehicle (more -> worse efficency). If the manufacturer says the car is "most effici
Re:My experiance with speed cameras (Score:3, Insightful)
But speed limits are not set with the emissions profile of the vehicles in mind. If they were then they'd be the same everywhere. And if they were then they would have been increasing as vehicles emissions have come down. The fact is speed limits are arbitrary. The only argument for sticking to a particular limit is simply that it is illegal not to, and if you're arguing for that then I expect to hear that you've never failed to
Re:My experiance with speed cameras (Score:3, Insightful)
No I was just trying to point out that the world isn't as black and white as was made out by the OP. His statement that speeding was necessarily worse for the environment was simplistic at best. The world is more complex than that.
No problems with people being caught for speeding.
Re:My experiance with speed cameras (Score:2)
Idea: don't speed (Score:3, Insightful)
One thing is certain, these cameras do not save any lives. I remember clearly once in hi
Mmm... (Score:4, Informative)
Information Superhighway (Score:4, Funny)
Obligatory (Score:5, Funny)
Heisenberg replied, "No, but I know where I am."
The Daily Telegraph? (Score:2)
Fun times for all. (Score:5, Informative)
There have been cases of cars being clocked at speeds greater than they are physically capable of doing, and a great brou-ha-ha about how travelling "five kph above the speed limit" doubles your risk of crashing (with some people extrapolating that to an exponential curve). (For the record: the research is five kph above the prevailing speed of the traffic, and it's not exponential.)
If speed camera evidence is deemed untrustworthy, you can see a large chunk of government revenue fly out the window; they'll be onto it as fast as they can get their snouts out of the pork barrel.
Re:Fun times for all. (Score:3, Insightful)
Zilch.
Re:Fun times for all. (Score:3, Insightful)
Indeed. Not only that but speedos just aren't that accurate so you can think you're dead on the limit but actually be 4km/h over.
Cheers
Stor
US cops are radar freaks? (Score:2)
Hello? have you ever been to the UK or to France? there is a friggin' *network* of automated speed cameras that track you every-bloody-where and send you the bill directly by mail. There is almost no place where you can truly go over the speed limit. The US is a relaxed, friendly place compared to those countries...
Slightly Off Topic Speeding Ticket Joke (Score:5, Funny)
So there was this guy driving through town one day, he was going about 100 in a 35, he crosses over a bridge and not too far past the end of it he sees the familiar blinking lights behind him and pulls over. The police officer comes up to the window and asks him where he's trying to get in such a hurry, and the guy says he's late for work.
The cop says "what job do you have that you have to get to so urgently?" and the guy says "I'm a Rectum Stretcher"
The cop looks a little funny at the guy and says "A Rectum Stretcher? What does a a Rectum Stretcher do?"
The guy says "well, first you start with a finger or two, work you way up to a fist, and keep going until it's six feet wide"
The cop looks absolutely amazed and says "Well, what do you do with a six foot asshole?" and the man replies
"You give him a radar gun and stick him at the end of a bridge".
Re:Slightly Off Topic Speeding Ticket Joke (Score:3, Funny)
there was 2 old couples driving on the freeway very slowly. they were probably doing 20MPH at most. cars behind them would honk and finally a highway patrol car pulled them over and asked they if they knew they were driving on the freeway. the old lady replied yes. he then suggested that they drive on the local streets because they were driving so slow. she goes, but that sign back there told us to drive at 20MPH. the highway patrol cracke
As usual... (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/motorist-wins
I.e., it wasn't thrown out because MD5 is suspect; it was thrown out because the government couldn't find an expert witness to be cross-examined, for some reason we don't know. In fact, I'd read that statement as meaning that the magistrate wanted to examine the entirety of speed camera security, not just MD5.
That part of the story is just a lawyer's opinion, not a fact. "Successfully", in the context of the previous quote, just means that his argument was unopposed in court.
My understanding is that it is easy to generate multiple messages that have the same MD5 hash, but only if you get to choose both messages. It's still very hard (i.e., an infeasibly large number of CPU cycles for most of us) to generate data that yields the same MD5 hash as some other, arbitrary document.
It all sounds to me more like a case of blinding a magistrate with science, than some kind of victory for common sense. (Well, lawyers are involved, so commonsense isn't relevant, anyway.)
Re:As usual... (Score:5, Insightful)
Ridiculous (Score:2)
Details (Score:5, Informative)
Basically, in 2004 Xiaoyun Wang released two different files with the same MD5 hash. This has been predicted since around 1996, when Hans Dobbertin showed the hash was broken -- but it took a while for the actual attack to show up.
Alot of people said there were _no_ applied uses. Not true. For instance, the following two pages have the same hash:
Lockheed Martin [doxpara.com]
Boeing [doxpara.com]
What's important to realize about the above content is that both web pages are included in both links; the difference between the source files (which MD5 is blind to) is just used to determine which page is displayed. What that means is that, for forensic purposes, it's trivial to rule out the best known attack against MD5 -- just look at the content being hashed.
Thats not to say we should keep using MD5. It's broken, we need to move on. But attempts to claim that MD5 is broken, so we have no idea of any link between hashed content and real material -- that's just ridiculous. We have plenty of idea, especially with human-guided forensic operations.
That being said -- if you can doctor a photo, you can doctor a hash. This is one of the things that makes files hosted on a single server w/ MD5 hashes "verifying" them a little silly...if you can alter the file, you can alter the
I was hoping someone else would post this story (Score:3, Interesting)
My question is how long before this sort of defence gets used against evidence in the form of video surveilence in general? How long before a bank robber can argue that the bank's security camera footage isn't secure? Or is this simply a classic case of a judge that does not understand, and a roads and traffic authority too apathetic and sure of itself to provide what's needed for the correct judgement?
I have no love of the RTA. In NSW it's now 3 points off your license for going over the speed limit by a single kilometer/hour, and 6 points for the same if it's a long weekend or holiday period. So basically you can now lose your license for doing 1 kilometer over the limit twice over a 3 year period.
Good riddance (Score:5, Interesting)
The extraordinary thing is that around the burbs, often I have to put my foot on the brake going down small hills just to ensure I don't edge over the limit. Perhaps sales of brake pads and cruise control equipment have increased substantially since the introduction of these fuckers. Both my parents have received speeding fines in the last few years, having gone for over forty years with a clean record.
As an aside, a few years back, one chap was flashed by the camera as he drove by and promptly responded by swerving into the offending machine, taking it out all together. Unfortunately, these cameras have a bunch of wire connected to a nearby van, which stores all the data. The cops simply lifted the last photo taken and arrested the guy. Though a tad rash in his response, I still consider him a legend.
What I like to do... (Score:3, Funny)
The ACT is at least reasonable (Score:3, Informative)
-post on the website the location of all fixed and mobile speed cameras http://www.canberraconnect.act.gov.au/speedcamera
-have big signs saying "RED LIGHT AND SPEED CAMERA AHEAD" for fixed cameras
If you get nabbed with those conditions, you deserve your ticket.
Kind of related... (Score:5, Informative)
The thing about speed limits and cameras is that they are set an arbitrary value which, on average, appears to suit the road. But it's like seat belts, there are times when wearing one is worse than not wearing one but on average its better to wear one. My particular bug-bear is speeds on motorways. A nice sunny Sunday morning when the road is empty 100mph is not dangerous. 50mph in the fog in rush hour is. Speed cameras don't generally account for that. Speed doesn't kill. Inappropriate speed kills.
There is one section of one motorway in the UK that has it right. A section of the M25 has adjusting speed limits and cameras to suit. I would like to see them on all motorways, moving from 30mph at the lower end to 100mph at the upper end. (Why 100 because that's the top speed of some small cars and having cars with differing speeds is also dangerous).
Re:Kind of related... (Score:4, Insightful)
I measure mine in miles per litre...
(cluestick for mods: HUMOUR)
Speeding (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes.
And I'd rather have a fine and a few points on my license than a murder conviction for running over a pedestrian at 90km/h in a 60km/h zone
Re:Better than trigger happy (Score:2)
Probably not the best term to use, considering fixed can mean "rigged to not work properly", as in they'll report you as speeding when you aren't
Re:Better than trigger happy (Score:4, Interesting)
So if you get caught speeding by one of those cameras then you're an idiot.
Actually, I kind of like the idea that enforcement of the law can be, in some circumstances at least, automated. There would be very few cases where speeding can be justified and, assuming that all equipment is working properly, it's a binary test: either you were over the speed limit or you weren't. There's not a lot of grey area there. I know a lot of people complain about them with arguments about revenue raising, but I have no problems with them whatsoever.
Re:Better than trigger happy (Score:3, Interesting)
Add to that the "vauge" traffic laws and often people being ticketed just didn't have a clue w
Re:If so many people are speeding... (Score:3, Insightful)
That's not insightful! That's ridiculous!
Speed limits are there for safety reasons.
Motorways are designed for high-speed transit, with shallow curves, sweeping inlets and outlets and long-distance signage. You can make some sort of case there, although I'd say that people need to be better drivers here in Australia.
I live in Melbourne, home of the angry bastard talking on his mobile while turning corners in his 4WD with the pedestrian-killer bullbar. These fools can barely cope with the speed limits we
Re:If so many people are speeding... (Score:3, Informative)
No, they're not. They're there to raise money. In fact, every supposedly "criminal" activity that is punished by a fine, as opposed to actual jail time, is a crime solely because punishing people for it serves to fill the coffers of the state.
In the case of speed limits, traffic engineers have known for quite a while that the safest speed limit for a given road is the 85-percentile speed - the speed that 85% of the traffic travels on that road. It's not speed tha
Re:Oh Yeah... (Score:3, Insightful)