this post was submitted on 10 May 2026
69 points (91.6% liked)

Privacy

5632 readers
284 users here now

Welcome! This is a community for all those who are interested in protecting their privacy.

Rules

PS: Don't be a smartass and try to game the system, we'll know if you're breaking the rules when we see it!

  1. Be civil and no prejudice
  2. Don't promote big-tech software
  3. No apathy and defeatism for privacy (i.e. "They already have my data, why bother?")
  4. No reposting of news that was already posted
  5. No crypto, blockchain, NFTs
  6. No Xitter links (if absolutely necessary, use xcancel)

Related communities:

Some of these are only vaguely related, but great communities.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kmartburrito@lemmy.world 20 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

That's why they need a little bit of seasoning. Some salt would do the trick. At least it would help with a dictionary/rainbow table based attack anyway

[–] e0qdk@reddthat.com 15 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Yep, salt. Also, there are much better options than MD5. I used bcrypt in systems I built a while back. There's also scrypt and argon2, which are newer. (Just be careful that you don't create a DoS vulnerability while hardening your login system...)

[–] kmartburrito@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yep, and md5 is only used by many because it's so fast. Cutting corners for speed's sake is always going to come with a penalty somewhere.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

And, you know, checksums, which MD5 is honestly great for

[–] doughless@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

MD5 is vulnerable to collisions, so it's possible for an attacker to match checksums, too.

[–] kingofras@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

You sound very salty for someone this knowledgeable.