Upgrade hash to sha256. #126
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Are you concerned about collisions? The hash here is not meant to be secure but just to ensure we don't have weird characters in the filename, and be reasonably fast... I guess it's still ok to use md5 for non-cryptographic purposes like here? |
|
Our import validation makes any use of crypto/md5 a bit painful regardless of the use case. That being said if you'd rather leave it as md5 here that's fine as we can work around it. |
|
Looks like sha256 is actually not significantly slower, so I guess why not 🤷♂️ |
yannh
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 16, 2022
yannh
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 16, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Use a stronger hash since md5 is generally discouraged at this point.