Charles-François Natali <neolo...@free.fr> added the comment: > v3 patch, based on feedback from the review here: > http://bugs.python.org/review/14532/show
Looks good to me. One last thing (sorry for not bringing this up earlier): I don't like bikeshedding, but at least to me, `time_independent_equals` is a bit too long to type, and sounds reductive (we don't want to specifically avoid only timing attacks, but provide a way to compare digests securely). What do you (all) think of something shorter, like `secure_compare`, `secure_equals`, or something along those lines? Note that I'm not good at finding names, so if others are fine with the current one, I won't object ;-) ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue14532> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
