3 ms·
For the next 500 years though? I suppose (as a crypto layman) it'll be fine, but given we don't know what will be broken within the next 500 years, isn't it nat
by gnulinux 4y ago
For the next 500 years though? I suppose (as a crypto layman) it'll be fine, but given we don't know what will be broken within the next 500 years, isn't it natural to add redundancy and use multiple hash algorithms?
- dylan604 4y agoI'd be more concerned for what equipment would be used to store/read that data in 50 years let alone 500 to make this even a viable thing to do.
- rainworld 4y agoIndeed. Hard to quantify the risk of one of these functions getting broken but it’s very low. There’s a million far more likely ways to lose that data.