tsarna@sarna.org (Ty Sarna) writes:

> In article <87y979kq32.fsf@snark.piermont.com>,
> Perry E. Metzger <perry@piermont.com> wrote:
> > 
> > No. Thor is absolutely correct. There is no advantage to an MD5
> > checksum of the file over any random function yielding 128 bits if you
> > do not check the hash later on.
> 
> So long as the "function yielding 128 bits" is truly a *function of the
> data*.

It does not need to be a function of the data because it is never
again checked against the data -- it is simply used as a unique identifier.

> A random number generator destroys the important property that
> identical source run through identical toolchain bits (which should
> include prebinding) produce identical files.  Violating this property is
> a major PITA, especially for testing...

You do have a point there. OTOH, timestamps etc. in the ELF files
already violate this, as you noted.

-- 
Perry E. Metzger		perry@piermont.com