I like.

I would have pushed for the emperor also knowing the unhashed secrets, but I missed the edit window and it’s otherwise fine.

I have never been able to get hashes to work for me but I won’t vote this down out of spite because that’s just a dumb course of action for a good proposal.

[Darknight] Would a step-by-step wiki essay help, or has it just been bad luck when you thought you’d copied down the plaintext correctly but hadn’t?

Can we implement a onsite hasher?

also another thing is the salt should not be some openly tracked variable c1
There *should* be a attack avaliable with H(p) and H(c1) but I’m not sure and I don’t like to play codebreaker so

Additionally words used in c1 leading to H(c1) is rainbow forceable

Oof - sorry; that’s worse - if I know H(c1) and can recover c1 I can treat H(c) = H(t+c1) effectively a known partial hash

(H() = hash function
c = cipher text, or hashed text
Edit: H(c) = H(t+c1) should be c = H(t+c1)
c1 = salt
t/p = plaintext)

If it’s done like the dice roller, an on-site hasher it would just be stand-alone PHP, right?

The downside is any concern that the hash input could be tracked without the user’s knowledge, leading to cheating by anyone with access to the PHP or its file or database output, whereas an offsite hasher won’t have that problem.

Don’t follow you there: the “any number of words” salt isn’t openly tracked, and it can be changed for each update.

I’ve wondered before about making a hasher that stored a user’s old messages in their browser’s cookies so they didn’t have to write them all down - which I think has been the only stumbling block in past dynasties, where people have either lost the original message or not even realised that they needed to keep it. But that could backfire by seeming more permanent than it actually is, if someone loses cookies mid-dynasty or assumes that they’re stored server-side and can be checked from other machines.

I suppose a simple page with a step-by-step that talked in general game terms and included a big red instruction to copy the message down might be a good thing to have.

Oof I thought H(p) is tracked publicly

But then hash collision means I can make H(p+c1) into H(p’ + c1’) to change what items I hold

Finding said c1’ is a problem in its own tho

Jona) we can implement something client side (there is the tool; generate Math.random() themselves and calculate the hash on the client’s computer

This attack is only possible when I determine my own salt; as a note

Javascript could still send a POST with the hash and its input to a URL for server-side storage, but I suppose it would be easier to notice.

Also, if we’re really worried about hash collision, pick a stronger hashing function. SHA256 has been around long enough to have fast implementations everywhere.

The important part is that we know we are using a effectively unbreakable scheme as far as BN is concerned and it is easy to use for all BN players

Yeah - you see the proposal? MD5
It is not *impossible* to find a collision - just Google MD5 collision generator

The salt explicitly having to be “words” limits that, but feel free to propose a limitation on the number or structure of them if you’re concerned. Or bump the whole thing up to SHA level.

Kevan) I think SHA level are better imo

I think we can go minimum viable product and simply add a “do not try to hack this” rule