On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Ben Caplan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We can just legislate that if you use a colliding hash, your vote
> doesn't count. Thus the reveal would look like {
> > <bar>
> "FOR /*8947521705932789*/"
> ("AGAINST /*8947521705932789*/" hashes to <baz>.)
> }
That doesn't prove anything. FOR /*42*/ and AGAINST /*42*/ might not
hash to the same value, but that doesn't mean that FOR /*42*/ and
AGAINST /*93748*/ do not. The fact is that no matter what seed you
choose, it's possibe to find a seed for the opposite vote that
collides with it, so such a rule would simply require us to invalidate
all votes.
Of course, all this indicates to me is that we should use something
stronger than MD5 for this.
-root
