The problem with this approach is that something that's good enough for This Use™ by the owner of the code will be seen by another person and then used by someone else with less understanding. The world of cryptography implementations is already contaminated enough with badly implemented Correct™ systems, let's not add more choices for weak and intrinsically broken systems.
On Mon, 2019-01-07 at 12:11 -0800, minfo...@arcor.de wrote: > But as I said, for non-crypto requirements weak data (or password) > obfuscation can be sufficient. > For such weak purposes an FNV-1 code 3-liner may be adequate. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
