Archives
Archives
| From: | Kent Fredric <kentnl@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Anti-spam for goose | ||
| Date: | Thu, 21 May 2020 13:09:57 | ||
| Message-Id: | 20200522010938.5df2f49b@katipo2.lan | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Anti-spam for goose by Ulrich Mueller |
||
| 1 | On Thu, 21 May 2020 14:25:00 +0200 |
| 2 | Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 | |
| 4 | > That's why I said salted hash. |
| 5 | |
| 6 | Even a salted hash becomes a trivial joke when the input data you're |
| 7 | hashing has a *total* entropy of only 32bits. |
| 8 | |
| 9 | You at very least need a unique salt per hash, or you only have to |
| 10 | expose the salt to create a rainbow table for the whole dataset. |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Anti-spam for goose | "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o> |
| Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Anti-spam for goose | "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o> |