On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 01:39:19PM +0100, Adam Langley wrote:
> * What's the new deal with the 21st byte (is it dead due to delow)

I think we are killing it and relying on PartSize in the storables.

> * Whats the spec for hashing Storable feilds in CHKs (and others?)

This is what I'm going on atm:

CHK routekey  = hash(hash(storables) + 
hash(progressive_hash_firstblock(encrypt(doc))))
SVK signature = sign(hash(storables) + 
hash(progressive_hash_firstblock(encrypt(doc))))

All keys will be verified with progressive hash streams just like CHKs.

-- 

# tavin cole
#
# "The process of scientific discovery is, in effect,
#  a continual flight from wonder."
#                                   - Albert Einstein


_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
Devl at freenetproject.org
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
>From - Sun May  6 15:05:36 2001
Return-Path: <devl-admin at freenetproject.org>
Received: from hawk.freenetproject.org (postfix@[4.18.42.11])
        by funky.danky.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA27161
        for <danello at danky.com>; Fri, 4 May 2001 09:03:00 -0400
Received: from hawk.freenetproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
        by hawk.freenetproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
        id 5480F58013; Fri,  4 May 2001 06:43:04 -0700 (PDT)
Delivered-To: devl at freenetproject.org
Received: from server5.generalmail.com (server5.fpw.ch [194.209.117.20])
        by hawk.freenetproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E60CD57D9E
        for <devl at freenetproject.org>; Fri,  4 May 2001 06:42:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([194.209.117.3]) by server5.generalmail.com
          (Post.Office MTA v3.5 release 215 ID# 0-58584U1100L100S0V35)

Reply via email to