Which type of attack would suggest that a hash function is compromised?

Which type of attack would suggest that a hash function is compromised?

• A. Phishing attack
• B. Preimage attack
• C. Man-in-the-middle attack
• D. Brute force attack

Answer: (B)

A preimage attack is indicative of a compromised hash function because it directly targets the fundamental properties that make hashing secure. In a secure hash function, given a hash output, it should be computationally infeasible to find any input that hashes to that output. A successful preimage attack means that an attacker was able to find an original input from its hash, demonstrating a serious flaw in the hash function's design or implementation. This type of attack challenges the integrity and reliability of the hashing algorithm. If attackers can effectively reverse-engineer a hash to retrieve its original input, it undermines the security protocols relying on that hash for data integrity, authentication, or any cryptographic processes that depend on non-reversibility. Therefore, the occurrence of a preimage attack serves as strong evidence that the hash function is not functioning as intended and may indeed be compromised. The other types of attacks listed do not directly involve the hash function's security properties in the same way. Phishing and man-in-the-middle attacks exploit human behaviors or network vulnerabilities, while brute force attacks focus on breaking cryptographic schemes by exhaustively attempting all possible combinations. None of these attacks specifically indicate a weakness in the mathematical design of a hash function itself. Thus, preimage attacks are uniquely linked

A preimage attack is indicative of a compromised hash function because it directly targets the fundamental properties that make hashing secure. In a secure hash function, given a hash output, it should be computationally infeasible to find any input that hashes to that output. A successful preimage attack means that an attacker was able to find an original input from its hash, demonstrating a serious flaw in the hash function's design or implementation.

This type of attack challenges the integrity and reliability of the hashing algorithm. If attackers can effectively reverse-engineer a hash to retrieve its original input, it undermines the security protocols relying on that hash for data integrity, authentication, or any cryptographic processes that depend on non-reversibility. Therefore, the occurrence of a preimage attack serves as strong evidence that the hash function is not functioning as intended and may indeed be compromised.

The other types of attacks listed do not directly involve the hash function's security properties in the same way. Phishing and man-in-the-middle attacks exploit human behaviors or network vulnerabilities, while brute force attacks focus on breaking cryptographic schemes by exhaustively attempting all possible combinations. None of these attacks specifically indicate a weakness in the mathematical design of a hash function itself. Thus, preimage attacks are uniquely linked