hashes

A privacy-busting determined enemy could generate hashes of large number of public sites and use statistics to infer what sites you've visited just from your hashes.

It sure sounds like that could pretty easily be solved by just sending hashes of the IP addresses along with the salt used to make the hashes.

So basically they're saying there are no file hashes for you to check, because the only way to download an ISO is through the Media Creation Tool.

If the attacker can get the list of password hashes, what's stopping him from getting your salts too?

If it's 3rd-party resources, wouldn't this make things like Google Analytics unable to be updated if they use hashes?

Then when the websites generate hashes, they can then append the salt and generate the hash.

It is true that not even bothing to randomize your hashes is worse than doing so.

Part of the way that FreeNET addresses the dating issue with hashes is to attach a version number to the content.

The hashes generally used for things like hash tables don't need to be cryptographically secure, and as such can be substantially simpler.

I don't understand this, the hashes I've played with for hashtables are just a bunch of bit shifts.

Every time there is an unauthorized data dump, we get lists of thousands of passwords or hashes thereof.

So, hash the stored password ahead of time, and hash the challenge password after receiving it, and then compare the two hashes.

You then try 16 dictionary "words" whose hashes start with the digit found previously with different second digits.

There are useless perfect hashes, like "password + 1", and there are much better ones that produce near-random output.

You try 16 dictionary "words" whose hashes start with 0...f.

Old text: "The hashes are also not under https domains.

Hashes in the blockchain, when necessary, and then markets which will sell you a file when presented with the hash.

Hashes like MD5, SHA1, and even SHA256 are designed to be fast.