HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
cr-marcstevens
sha1collisiondetection
C2017–2025
cr-marcstevens / sha1collisiondetection

sha1collisiondetection

Library and command line tool to detect SHA-1 collision in a file

17Distinct people
19Mentions
2Explicit recommenders
1.4KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Library and command line tool to detect SHA-1 collision in a file

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

Each new _unrelated_ SHA1 attack will need an update in SHA1DC. But it has to be truly unrelated, as the collision detection method is fairly robust. I recommend reading the…

theamk used a recommendation phrase. 2 indexed comments match. This is a phrase match, not a verdict.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 8–Nov 15 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/15/2026, 1:57:11 AM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year19 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2017-02-23 14:39:53 UTC to 2025-03-26 14:05:46 UTC.

02462017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 7 mentions; 1 submissions, 6 comments20172018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 4 mentions; 0 submissions, 4 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments20212022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 1 submissions, 2 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2025

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC716
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC404
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC312
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

7 sources
It is possible; the researchers estimate the likelihood of a false positive at 2^-90 (which puts us back in "Sun engulfs the Earth" territory). There are metrics that will alert GitHub's infrastructure team if a collision is found (to confirm that we aren't seeing any false positives). Those metrics were quietly shipped (without the matching "die") for a week before flipping the final switch. If you want to know more about the patterns, see the sha1collisiondetection project: https://github.com/cr-marcstevens/sha1collisiondetection There's a research paper linked in the README.
In SHA-1 Collision Detection on GitHub.com
Aissen·Feb 23, 2017Recommendation phrase
I love the fact that there is a tool for detecting any collision using this algorithm: https://github.com/cr-marcstevens/sha1collisiondetection and it's super effective: The possibility of false positives can be neglected as the probability is smaller than 2^-90. It's also interesting that this attack is from the same author that detected that Flame (the nation-state virus) was signed using an unknown collision algorithm on MD5 (cited in the shattered paper introduction).
In Announcing the first SHA-1 collision

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.