Subject: Re: [boost] [optional] operator<(optional<T>, T) -- is it wrong?
From: Howard Hinnant (howard.hinnant_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-12-02 17:40:40
On Dec 2, 2014, at 3:44 PM, Niall Douglas <s_sourceforge_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Out of curiosity I went and looked up what Python did to solve this
> (here's the discussion: http://bugs.python.org/issue13703). In the
> end, they simply XOR salted the hash with a cryptographically
> generated random number produced at process launch (source:
> and carried on with their previous algorithm.
Here is a very short python script:
which appears to recover those random salts for the process. I tried it out on 2.7.5 and it appears to work really well. This comes from the SipHash website, which also contains short programs for compromising randomly seeded MurmurHash and CityHash.