On 2014-05-28, Dan Sommers wrote:

> On Tue, 27 May 2014 17:02:50 +0000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> - rather than "zillions" of them, there are few enough of them that
>>  the chances of an MD5 collision is insignificant;
>>   (Any MD5 collision is going to play havoc with your strategy of
>>   using hashes as a proxy for the real string.)
>> - and you can arrange matters so that you never need to MD5 hash a
>>   string twice.
> Hmmm...  I'll use the MD5 hashes of the strings as a key, and the
> strinsgs as the value (to detect MD5 collisions) ...

Hey, I'm not *that* stupid.

In the 1970s, people began receiving utility bills for
-£999,999,996.32 and it became harder to sustain the 
myth of the infallible electronic brain. (Verity Stob)

Reply via email to