bluesky AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Global-Scale Distributed Storage Systems
List archive
- From: hal AT finney.org
- To: bluesky AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
- Subject: Re: Freenet's hashing algorithm
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 18:03:57 -0800
graydon AT venge.net writes:
> yeah, I get the general idea, but I think you're seriously misapplying
> the concept of a hash as a trust device. a hash of a chunk of data tells
> you nothing about the trustworthyness of the chunk. you need a trust
> relationship with a signing key, and a signature, and a simple hash
> doesn't give you this.
A CHK is trustworthy in only one respect: you can trust that the returned
document is the one pointed to by the CHK. Certainly you can identify
other forms of trust that may involve bringing in cryptography and such.
But this one simple trust property is still useful. Many naming systems
lack this guarantee - URLs on the web today, for example.
Hal
-
Freenet's hashing algorithm,
hal, 02/15/2001
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: Freenet's hashing algorithm, graydon, 02/15/2001
- Re: Freenet's hashing algorithm, hal, 02/16/2001
- Re: Freenet's hashing algorithm, graydon, 02/16/2001
- Re: Freenet's hashing algorithm, hal, 02/16/2001
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.