Re:Short, friendly base32 slugs from timestamps
by zlib on Thursday January 19, 2023 @04:26AM
(#34438352)
I always go for Hashids (https://hashids.org/)
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Short, friendly base32 slugs from timestamps
by tokumei on Thursday January 19, 2023 @04:46AM
(#34438470)
Hashids are nice
Re:Short, friendly base32 slugs from timestamps
by vore on Thursday January 19, 2023 @04:50AM
(#34438488)
I've never been sure of the use case of hashids. They're not really a security measure since they can be easily defeated; you might as well just expose the sequential ID at that point. If you do need something with better properties, you should probably be using UUIDv6.
Re:Short, friendly base32 slugs from timestamps
by junon on Thursday January 19, 2023 @05:13AM
(#34438663)
> they can be easily defeated
How? I mean they're of course no cryptographic measure but with the salt you have some secrecy.
Re:Short, friendly base32 slugs from timestamps
by paulgb on Thursday January 19, 2023 @06:17AM
(#34439106)
If an attacker can generate sequential hashids, they can decipher the alphabet order that hashids use without needing to know the seed, and then use the seed to invert other hashids.
I wrote a library that generates short IDs with the goal of making the similarity between two codes have nothing to do with sequence order.
Re:Short, friendly base32 slugs from timestamps
by hoherd on Thursday January 19, 2023 @07:42AM
(#34439697)
Fwiw, hashids do not solve OP's use case:
> Hashids is a small open-source library that generates short, unique, non-sequential ids from numbers.
vs the summary in the article:
> So now when I list atoms from my filesystem or in S3, they come back in the same order that I wrote them.