I know that encryption entails more than cryptographic hash functions -- to quote my previous message, "a cryptographic hash function would be necessary (though, I realize, not sufficient)."
Based on message context and common sense, no, I am not working with encrypted documents containing publicly-available specifications (!). The spec documentation leaves much to be desired, hence it needs to be "deciphered" (interpreted, understood). So, please add me to the list of customers interested in an xdmp:sha1(). > It would help to be careful with verbs here. Encryption is very different > from a cryptographic hash both algorithmically and in commerce (export regs). > > I presume you are not using decryption to "decipher" the documentation. I > hope you are reading it. > > The SHA-1 algorithm does not "encrypt". It hashes. > > wunder _______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general
