Hello,
Does this mean that it is not so hard to adapt SHA algorithm to a better one ?:D
DRH suspected that it would be hard :D :D :D
Of course I don't agree with DRH ; I will never agree with him about security
discuss either ... :-|
Thank to "sgbeal". :-)
Best Regards
K.
De : Stephan Beal <sgb...@googlemail.com>
À : Fossil SCM user's discussion <fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org>
Envoyé le : Dimanche 26 février 2017 21h58
Objet : Re: [fossil-users] Google Security Blog: Announcing the first SHA1
collision
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 10:34 PM, Richard Hipp <d...@sqlite.org> wrote:
And in any event, I don't think centralization is a factor here.
Fossil is better positioned than Git or Mercurial to transition to a
different hash algorithm because the Fossil implementation uses a
relational database as its backing store. Git and Hg, in contrast,
both use bespoke pile-of-files database formats which, I suspect, will
be more difficult to adapt.
just FYI, Linus' own words on the topic, posted yesterday:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/+LinusTorvalds/posts/7tp2gYWQugL
--
----- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/"Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's
the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist on a perfect world, freedom
will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
