On Saturday, 8 February 2014 at 21:59:24 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/7/2014 6:50 AM, "Marc Schütz" <[email protected]>" wrote:
The specific problem was that it was possible to provoke hash
collisions by
sending carefully crafted input, causing the hash-tables to
degrade to linked
lists. The small performance penalty of using
collision-resistant hashes is
certainly worth it in this case.
That has nothing to do with needing exceptions in the control
flow path (and the performance penalty for using exceptions in
this manner is certainly not small).
Huh? I responded to this discussion:
On Friday, 7 February 2014 at 08:30:35 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/6/2014 7:08 PM, bearophile wrote:
That's why some languages have changed their sorting and
hashing routines to
make them a little slower but safer on default.
DoS attack resistance requires faster code, not slower code.
I was merely clarifying why in this specific case making the
average code path slower _did_ help DoS attack resistance.
