Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by CydeWeys 3382 days ago
There's two potentially mitigating factors at play here:

I suspect a lot of the tools you mentioned also already treat hashes as strings, not as 160 bit numeric types. The entire front-end JS for GitHub, for example, just uses strings. That's what I'd do if I were writing IDE integrations and such too.

Secondly, the new format will likely still be a 160-bit numeric type, just calculated using a different hash algorithm (e.g. it might be the first 160 bits of the SHA256 result). The tools you mentioned likely don't have to calculate said hashes, they just display them. The entire GitHub front-end, for instance, just displays whatever is given to it; commit hashes are input data to it, not output data.

1 comments

Just using the first 160 bits of a new hash function was proposed at one point, but it's not part of the current plan. The new plan is to introduce full SHA3-256 hashes (which are 256 bits in size). More information here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/18hYAQCTsDgaFUo-VJGhT0Uqy...

(Of course, CLI and frontend tools could still truncate display output to 40 hex characters, but internally full size hashes will be used.)

Woah, that's disorienting to be linked to a bluedoc unexpectedly like that, considering I'm not on my work account. I ever recognize one of the authors.
What is a bluedoc?
It's just a Google Docs template used for internal engineering design docs at Google. The linked doc is a typical example.