[uf-discuss] Re: Software Projects Description
timber at lava.net
Mon Oct 9 17:19:54 PDT 2006
On Oct 9, 2006, at 2:02 PM, Karl Dubost wrote:
> - How many common public softwares (downloadable from a Web page) do
> MD5 or SHA?
I can go dig up some URLs and post them on the wiki, if need be
(although I think some of the obvious ones like SourceForge are
already on there and do provide checksums).
> - The average user will never do MD5
> not, because it is too much effort
> but he or she is not a geek.
All the more reason why it should be easier for browser manufacturers
(or 3rd party developers) to build this sort of thing right in to the
browser. I'm not seeing how's it could possibly be a Bad Thing for an
optional checksum to be included.
> - MD5 or SHA are useful only for a small geek community where the
> software is released on a distributed network (Linux, open source
> projects, etc.)
I disagree. Having the MD5 or SHA checksum prevents the problem of
downloading a file and then having it either corrupted, and/or not
> PS: geek is not used qs a dismissive term.
I should hope not, considering this is a highly technical mailing
More information about the microformats-discuss