Re:Making Connections to Facebook More Secure
by wowaname on Friday October 31, 2014 @07:38PM
(#8541623)
Then move to I2P where there are inanely long .b32.i2p hashes. I believe Tor stuck to sixteen to balance ease of use with security. I2P decided not to truncate their hashes since they already have memorable short.i2p entries in downloadable hosts files.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Making Connections to Facebook More Secure
by haakon on Saturday November 01, 2014 @06:29AM
(#8542663)
.onion addresses aren't particularly memorable anyway (Facebook's nonwithstanding). They wouldn't have to go to insane lengths like I2P does, but it seems like not cutting the SHA-1 in half would make it much stronger. I just feel like in striking a balance, they should err on the side of huge security margins. On the other hand, I don't really have an intuition for the strength of the current addresses, so it's not meant as criticism as much as a quest for understanding.
Re:Making Connections to Facebook More Secure
by wowaname on Wednesday November 05, 2014 @05:08PM
(#8564573)
Although I agree it isn't cakewalk to memorise an onion URL, it is possible and many people do it usually by grouping or mnemonics. I'm not against any change/improvement to the current address generation system in Tor; there are certainly other better possibilities for both security and scalability.