<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Fear and loathing in the Intertubes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/security-bytes/fear-and-loathing-in-the-intertubes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/security-bytes/fear-and-loathing-in-the-intertubes/</link>
	<description>A SearchSecurity.com blog</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 11:17:33 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: John Sniping Doe</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/security-bytes/fear-and-loathing-in-the-intertubes/#comment-583</link>
		<dc:creator>John Sniping Doe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 18:50:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://security.blogs.techtarget.com/2009/01/02/fear-and-loathing-in-the-intertubes/#comment-583</guid>
		<description>"But for whatever reason, that wasn’t good enough for some people."

After all the PR &#38; drama, I think a lot of people were expecting a more interesting attack.  This one, with some very nice technical details, can be summed up as "using MD5 bad."    If it was the equivalent on SHA-1, they'd deserve this amount of attention, no question.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;But for whatever reason, that wasn’t good enough for some people.&#8221;</p>
<p>After all the PR &amp; drama, I think a lot of people were expecting a more interesting attack.  This one, with some very nice technical details, can be summed up as &#8220;using MD5 bad.&#8221;    If it was the equivalent on SHA-1, they&#8217;d deserve this amount of attention, no question.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- dynamic -->