RetroSearch Browse

Sat Dec 31 13:03:22 CET 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-December/115169.html

Victor Stinner writes:

 > Let's try to summarize this "vulnerability".
 > 
 > The creation of a Python dictionary has a complexity of O(n) in most 
 > cases, but O(n^2) in the *worst* case. The attack tries to go into the 
 > worst case. It requires to compute a set of N keys having the same hash 
 > value (hash(key1) == hash(key2) == ... hash(keyN)). It only has to 
 > compute these keys once. It looks like it is now cheap enough in 
 > practice to compute this dataset for Python (and other languages).

I don't know the implementation issues well enough to claim it is a
solution, but this hasn't been mentioned before AFAICS:

While the dictionary probe has to start with a hash for backward
compatibility reasons, is there a reason the overflow strategy for
insertion has to be buckets containing lists?  How about
double-hashing, etc?

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-December/115169.html below:

[Python-Dev] Hash collision security issue (now public)