Re: [fossil-users] on sha1 as a hash

2016-10-19 Thread jungle Boogie
On 19 October 2016 at 11:48, Scott Robison wrote: > Given that it is impossible to predict exactly how one will solve a given > problem (and thus what its hash would be) in advance, the speed of fossil's > default auto sync, the fact that no one has yet demonstrated an

Re: [fossil-users] on sha1 as a hash

2016-10-19 Thread Aldo Nicolas Bruno
On 19/10/2016 02:45, K. Fossil user wrote: > Hi, > > 1/ Does Fossil use SHA1 ? > Oo > Too bad if it is. > At least I expect that we've got a choice : sha256, sha512, etc. ... from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-1#Data_integrity Revision control

Re: [fossil-users] on sha1 as a hash

2016-10-19 Thread jungle Boogie
On 19 October 2016 at 14:19, jungle Boogie wrote: > That said, I see sha1.c comes from openBSD and netBSD. OpenBSD > revision on the sha1.c in fossil shows version 1.9 and openbsd's > version has been updated several times to 1.26: Meanwhile netbsd hasn't made any

Re: [fossil-users] on sha1 as a hash

2016-10-19 Thread K. Fossil user
Hi, In this thread I try to: give short answer to what I've read, then I give my opinion, and finally I put some suggests : 1/ Thanks to people who give their opinions and technical point of view in this topic.2/ I know that Git uses sha1, debian uses md5,sha1,sha256 , etc. ...The point is not

Re: [fossil-users] on sha1 as a hash

2016-10-19 Thread Scott Robison
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 2:36 AM, Aldo Nicolas Bruno wrote: > Better question can be, how fossil manage collisions? > Fossil rejects new artifacts with matching hashes, working on the assumption that it already has the blob. The only way someone could hope to exploit this