On Sat, Jan 18, 2003 at 04:50:37PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> I am beginning to think that using CHKs for SplitFile checksums isn't a good
> idea.
>
> If we use something that is widely deployed like MD5, then SplitFile client
> authors can check the checksum themselves using their local system library,
> without having to do an FCP request.
>
> I think insertion/retrieval client authors will be annoyed if we make them
> send their entire file *over the wire* just to get a checksum CHK. Think
> ISOs.....
>
> Would there be any objections to using MD5? Is there a cannonical GPL'd java
> implementation?
MD5 has a key collision weakness, which is why we've been using SHA-1
pervasively.
>
> If we go this route I will add an MD5 FCP command.
How would this help? An FCP command would require that you send the
file over the wire...
Scott
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20030118/752cada6/attachment.pgp>
