Christian Heimes <li...@cheimes.de> added the comment:
JP got back to me On 07/10/2021 14.34, Jean-Philippe Aumasson wrote: > xxHash is much faster indeed, but collisions seem trivial to find, which > might allow hash-flood DoS again (see for example > https://github.com/Cyan4973/xxHash/issues/180 > <https://github.com/Cyan4973/xxHash/issues/180>). It's however unclear > whether exploitable multicollisions can also be trivially found. > > If collisions don't matter and if the ~10x speed-up makes a difference, > then probably a good option, but guess you'll need to keep SipHash (or > some other safe hash) when DoS resistance is needed? This information disqualifies xxHash for our use case. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue29410> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
