5 ms·
If I were eyeballing two hashes to make sure they were equal, I'd worry about my ability to see near collisions (similar to [0]) the longer the hashes were. My
by npongratz 10y ago
If I were eyeballing two hashes to make sure they were equal, I'd worry about my ability to see near collisions (similar to [0]) the longer the hashes were. My eyes just start skipping ahead at some point, and would probably miss different-but-similar-looking characters in the middle.
But I think SHA-512 is resistant to near-collisions (sorry, I don't have a citation), and besides, one would probably best compare hashes using a script one understands.
[0] http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2F978-3-540-28628-8_18.pdf http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2F978-3-540-286...
- jgrowl 10y agoMaybe we just need better tooling to help us compare hashes easier. Not exactly sure what that would look like though.
- throwawayish 10y agoColor the character boxes and display in two adjacent lines.
- syrrim 10y ago>I think SHA-512 is resistant to near-collisions All good hash functions have an even distribution, and are therefore resistant to near-collisions. Hash tables for example require this property to work properly.