4 ms·

you dont need to get the original ip back, just need to know how many unique ips are there, so sha(ip) is good enough

• seri4l 3y ago
  I apologize for the double negative. What I meant is that hashing doesn't improve privacy because if you know the hash and the hashing function it's easy to build a hashmap of all the possible IPv4s (around 3.5B). Unless the hash uses some sort of expensive key derivation function, but that doesn't scale.
  • GordonS 3y ago
    You could simply salt the hash, though you'd need to treat the salt as a secret. Alternatively, you could use a new salt every day, which would only allow you to track an individual for a 24 hour period (likely enough for many).
• quesomaster9000 3y ago
  With little over 4 billion IPv4 addresses. From a stackoverflow post from 12 years ago: > I know I do 622 million SHA-256's per sec on a Radeon HD5830. Which would take around 6 seconds to brute force a 32bit address space.
  • throwaway71271 3y ago
    you can just salt it with some stable random thing
    • toast0 3y ago
      In which case you can just take 6 seconds to generate all the new hashes and build a new lookup table.
      • operator-name 3y ago
        You can further add bucketing, and eventually move closer to FLoC. But this is aside the point, as the spirit of the law only allows "processing for legitimate interests". The use of technology, cookies or on the server is irrelevant. If thread OP has evaluated their collection[0] as legitimate, they can use whatever technology within guidelines. Otherwise, even a cookie less data collection would require consent. [0]: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/lawful-basis-for-processing/legitimate-interests/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio...