On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 13:57:07 +0100 Armin Ronacher <armin.ronac...@active-4.com> wrote: > > - Option c: Random salt at runtime > + Easy to implement > - impossible to synchronize > - breaks unittests in the same way as a compiled in salt would do
This option would have my preference. I don't think hash() was ever meant to be "synchronizable". Already using a 32-bit Python will give you different results from a 64-bit Python. As for breaking unittests, these tests were broken in the first place. hash() does change from time to time. > Where to add the salt to? Unicode strings and bytestrings (byte > objects) I guess since those are the most common offenders. Sometimes > tuples are keys of dictionaries but in that case a contributing factor > to the hash is the string in the tuple anyways. Or it could be a process-wide constant for all dicts. If the constant is additive as proposed by Mark the impact should be negligible. (but the randomness must be good enough) Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
