top | item 46981387 (no title) seg_lol | 18 days ago They should have used base64 encryption. discuss order hn newest HiPhish|18 days ago How about ROT13? Ideally applied twice for twice the encryption. CrazyStat|18 days ago ROT13 is cheap enough that you can afford to apply it many more times. I use one million iterations to store passwords securely. load replies (1) foobarchu|17 days ago Md5 encryption would be far superior. CobrastanJorji|18 days ago There are performance concerns with base64. Hardware-assisted null-key encryption offers security that's a non-strict superset of base64 encryption and with superior performance. hn_acc1|18 days ago null-key encryption is write-once, read-never, so you don't have to cache it.
HiPhish|18 days ago How about ROT13? Ideally applied twice for twice the encryption. CrazyStat|18 days ago ROT13 is cheap enough that you can afford to apply it many more times. I use one million iterations to store passwords securely. load replies (1) foobarchu|17 days ago Md5 encryption would be far superior.
CrazyStat|18 days ago ROT13 is cheap enough that you can afford to apply it many more times. I use one million iterations to store passwords securely. load replies (1)
CobrastanJorji|18 days ago There are performance concerns with base64. Hardware-assisted null-key encryption offers security that's a non-strict superset of base64 encryption and with superior performance. hn_acc1|18 days ago null-key encryption is write-once, read-never, so you don't have to cache it.
HiPhish|18 days ago
CrazyStat|18 days ago
foobarchu|17 days ago
CobrastanJorji|18 days ago
hn_acc1|18 days ago