On 8/4/2019 3:21 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
> I'd say just enumerate the acceptable algorithms. You could probably just
> start with SHA256 - it's secure and easy to find calculators for online.
lol sure I suppose there's no point in coming up with an elegantly-crafted
general definition (as pretty
On 8/4/19 6:17 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On 8/4/2019 3:10 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
On 8/4/19 6:09 PM, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk wrote:
On Sun, 2019-08-04 at 14:55 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
[* do we need to define what a "hash method" is or is that in
common-enough use to leave to common
On 8/4/2019 3:10 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
On 8/4/19 6:09 PM, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk wrote:
On Sun, 2019-08-04 at 14:55 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
[* do we need to define what a "hash method" is or is that in
common-enough use to leave to common definitions?]
Fun though it would be to scam
On 8/4/19 6:09 PM, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk wrote:
On Sun, 2019-08-04 at 14:55 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
[* do we need to define what a "hash method" is or is that in
common-enough use to leave to common definitions?]
Fun though it would be to scam this myself, in the spirit of "catch
On Sun, 2019-08-04 at 14:55 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> [* do we need to define what a "hash method" is or is that in
> common-enough use to leave to common definitions?]
Fun though it would be to scam this myself, in the spirit of "catch
loopholes rather than exploit them": the common definition
5 matches
Mail list logo
