On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:07:04PM -0400, David Golden wrote:
I completely understand and respect that as an alternative (with
associated costs).
I should add that this is a reason why I was quite happy to see Perl
offer multiple hash implementations at compile time, so those who
didn't like p5p's choice of default could select an alternative that
suits their own risk/cost tradeoffs.
I am not sure how many times it was pointed out in this thread, and not
just by me, that the quality of the hash function itself does zilch to
improve security, because none of them can be secure (their complexity is
too low, simply by choice of data types, to avoid collisions).

But surely it was often.

It's the other stuff around it that generates security, or not.

                 The choice of a Deliantra, the free code+content MORPG
       -----==- _GNU_ http://www.deliantra.net
       ----==-- _ generation
       ---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann
       --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / schmorp@schmorp.de
       -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions



site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase