http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3333
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-04-29 20:28 ------- Defer it to 3.1.x. I can see reasons to have all three cases available to the user (1. recoverable hashed tokens, 2. unrecoverable hashed tokens, 3. salted unrecoverable hashed tokens) (1) is needed for debugging and analysis, (2) is for efficiency and seems to be the preferred general case, and (3) is good for privacy. It sounds like we have (2) implemented now and there's a good development/research case for (1); (3) is nice to have for paranoiacs. If the hashed tokens aren't meant to be recovered, why not make it more difficult to recover them? Defer it; it's good for privacy, but with 0 votes I'd opine that it's not worth delaying 3.0.x. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
