Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by bradknowles 708 days ago
Looks like the last time the code itself was touched was about seven months ago. And there are no open issues. I did spot the following in the README.md file: ``` An optional MD5 checksum can be calculated as well for the transferred file to verify that the content is the same as the source file. The server provides its own MD5 for comparison once the file is written. However, this would only be an additional level of redundancy as quic has a reliability guarantee already built into the protocol. ``` Could we make this SHA-256 or something else a little more modern and robust than MD5?
1 comments

Hey man, had no reason to work on the code further, was a one man experimentation with no incentive to work on it further. The use of MD5 was not meant for security guarantees but instead as a way to ensure the integrity of content. There would be no reason to use SHA-256 in this case, not worried about security since that would be handled through use of SSL/TLS between server and client, which is already available.