[Python-Dev] Status of the fix for the hash collision vulnerability (original) (raw)
Guido van Rossum guido at python.org
Tue Jan 17 02🔞27 CET 2012
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Status of the fix for the hash collision vulnerability
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Status of the fix for the hash collision vulnerability
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Victor Stinner < victor.stinner at haypocalc.com> wrote:
2012/1/17 Tim Delaney <timothy.c.delaney at gmail.com>: > What if in a pathological collision (e.g. > 1000 collisions), we increased > the size of a dict by a small but random amount?
It doesn't change anything, you will still get collisions.
That depends right? If the collision is because they all have the same hash(), yes. It might be different if it is because the secondary hashing (or whatever it's called :-) causes collisions.
-- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20120116/5968844c/attachment.html>
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Status of the fix for the hash collision vulnerability
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Status of the fix for the hash collision vulnerability
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]