Another caveat that I might as well throw out there is that checksums become less reliable the larger the file size. There are an infinite number of files that correspond to each checksum value. That applies to MD5, SHA, Tigers, everything. And for each size of file there is a large, though not infinite, number of files that correspond to each checksum. What ur hoping for is that files u compare using checksums already share substantial similarity. So that if a few bytes are off, or even hundreds of thousands, the fundamental similarity of the files will prevent the checksums from being the same. I know that sounds backwards but it's because checksums rely on the random dissimilarity of files with the same checksum. Like files that digest to the same checksum will be wildly different and there's no way they would be mistaken as the same file by a person. For very large files I would throw in a few more random comparisons of actual data from various parts of the file. Obviously only for files of the same size.
-- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede malis" 00000100 _______________________________________________ Perl-Win32-Users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe: http://listserv.ActiveState.com/mailman/mysubs
