Am 01.01.2012 17:54, schrieb Antoine Pitrou: > I don't understand. FNV-1 multiplies the current running result with a > prime and then xors it with the following byte. This is also what we do. > (I'm assuming 1000003 is prime) There must be a major difference somewhere inside the algorithm. The talk at the CCC conference in Berlin mentions that Ruby 1.9 is not vulnerable to meet-in-the-middle attacks and Ruby 1.9 uses FNV. The C code of FNV is more complex than our code, too. Christian
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4