Assuming SHA-1 is indeed cryptographically secure (which is the
assumption made by the venti paper)
Well, I read it like it was just sufficiently secure against
unintended collisions.
It's not intended to encrypt, but to efficiently store data.
While SHA-1 is indeed not intended to
Even if venti scores are completely unguessable,
using them as an authentication mechanism
is a mistake, because you can't change them.
It would be like having a fixed, unchangeable password
assigned to your account: once the password leaked
out into the world, one way or another, you'd have
no
http://www.google.com/search?q=09+f9;
is that a legal url?
- erik
On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 12:41 -0500, erik quanstrom wrote:
http://www.google.com/search?q=09+f9;
is that a legal url?
I don't think it is a legal URL, but most browsers
will turn it into a legal one before issuing a
GET request.
Thanks,
Roman.
P.S. Or am I missing some kind of a joke here?
http://www.google.com/search?q=09+f9;
is that a legal url?
P.S. Or am I missing some kind of a joke here? ;-)
Intentional or not, it's a very good joke.
Micah
On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 10:22 -0800, Micah Stetson wrote:
http://www.google.com/search?q=09+f9;
is that a legal url?
P.S. Or am I missing some kind of a joke here? ;-)
Intentional or not, it's a very good joke.
but...but...erik always adds that look-i-am-using-plan9-smiley
to all of
http://www.google.com/search?q=09+f9;
is that a legal url?
- erik
fortune worthy :D
but...but...erik always adds that look-i-am-using-plan9-smiley
to all of his jokes. i'm so confused...
i do? i guess ya learn something every day.
- erik
On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 05:40:01PM +0900, sqweek wrote:
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 9:54 PM, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
Yes, but the content isn't guaranteed to be from a single user. In
fact, venti has no clue. Change that and it's not venti anymore.
exactly. but it's
On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 11:40:51AM -0500, Nathaniel W Filardo wrote:
entire sun-facing solid angle of the earth into a similarly perfect
computer, we get 2^192/2^32*(4.5 x 10^(-10)) ~~ 2^129 addition operations in
Rats, I got overly happy with exponentiation (should be 2^5, not 2^32).
Assuming SHA-1 is indeed cryptographically secure (which is the assumption
made by the venti paper)
Well, I read it like it was just sufficiently secure against
unintended collisions.
It's not intended to encrypt, but to efficiently store data.
11 matches
Mail list logo
