On Thursday 23 April 2009 21:14:01 guido wrote: > Am Donnerstag 23 April 2009 14:48:43 schrieb Matthew Toseland: > > I would really appreciate input on option 2 i.e. how much of a problem are > > long CHKs? > > If CHK key lengths as they are now are not bad enough to keep people from > using them, then making them 50% longer won't be, either.
Twice as long. > > Besides, making the pathname of the file a mandatory part of the key is already > having larger impact on average key lengths then this would.
