3 ms·
These human-readable encoding systems are nifty, but a higher goal is to design secure systems that don't require humans to read or type (or copy and paste) ran
by jasperry 6y ago
These human-readable encoding systems are nifty, but a higher goal is to design secure systems that don't require humans to read or type (or copy and paste) random strings of bytes.
For techies, occasionally eyeballing a hash as an informal check will continue to be useful, but I can't imagine that confusing 1 and l would ever be an issue in that use case.
- rini17 6y agoIn a secure system there is always going to be an airgap with a need for human to check what went over the gap before committing the transaction. Nonrandom strings of bytes, such as names, are also spoofable, so not much better in this regard.