RetroSearch Browse

Sat Jan 14 02:35:14 CET 2012 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-January/115492.html

> - Glenn Linderman proposes to fix the vulnerability by adding a new
> "safe" dict type (only accepting string keys). His proof-of-concept
> (SafeDict.py) uses a secret of 64 random bits and uses it to compute
> the hash of a key.

We could mix Marc's collision counter with SafeDict idea (being able
to use a different secret for each dict): use hash(key, secret)
(simple example: hash(secret+key)) instead of hash(key) in dict (and
set), and change the secret if we have more than N collisions. But it
would slow down all dict lookup (dict creation, get, set, del, ...).
And getting new random data can also be slow.

SafeDict and hash(secret+key) lose the benefit of the cached hash
result. Because the hash result depends on a argument, we cannot cache
the result anymore, and we have to recompute the hash for each lookup
(even if you lookup the same key twice ore more).

Victor

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-January/115492.html below:

[Python-Dev] Status of the fix for the hash collision vulnerability