3 ms·
This might be completely naive but can a reversible time component be incorporated into distinguishing two hash calculations? Meaning when unpacked/extrapolated
by datameta 1y ago
This might be completely naive but can a reversible time component be incorporated into distinguishing two hash calculations? Meaning when unpacked/extrapolated it is a unique signifier but when decomposed it folds back into the standard calculation - is this feasible?
- ruined 1y agohashes by definition are not reversible. you could store a timestamp together with a hash, and/or you could include a timestamp in the digested content, but the timestamp can’t be part of the hash.
- RetroTechie 1y ago> hashes by definition are not reversible. Sure they are. You could generate every possible input, compute hash & compare with a given one. Ok it might take infinite amount of compute (time/energy). But that's just a technicality, right?
- dagw 1y agoSure they are. You could generate every possible input Depends entirely on what you mean by reversible. For every hash value, there are an infinite number of inputs that give that value. So while it is certainly possible to find some input that hashes to a given value, you cannot know which input I originally hashed to get that that value.
- datameta 1y agoOh, of course, the timestamp could instead be metadata!
- shakna 1y agoSome hashes do have verification bits, that are used not just to verify intact hash, but one "identical" hash from another. However, they do tend to be slower hashes.
- grumbelbart2 1y agoDo you have an example? That just sounds like a hash that is a few bits longer.
- shakna 1y agoMostly use of GCM (Galois/Counter Mode). Usually you tag the key, but you can also tag the value to check verification of collisions instead. But as I said, slow.