> Regarding the CD Index algorithm: there have been several posts about
> those extra zeros (since an MD5 hash is sensitive to them). I'm not sure
> whether a change was resolved to be made or what, tho. Personally, I'm
> not sure that I understand the reason for the change, but I bet it was
> somewhere in the initial flood of email that ensued after the break of
> the Slashdot story re: CDDB.
>
> [ I would love for somebody on the CD Index list to educate me on the
> rationale for the change... thx! ]
Well, a ton of people complained that the MD5 algorithm was 'not free
enough' and that the code was sensitive to the endianess of the host
machine. So, the changes reflect moving to SHA1 and the avoid byte
order problems.
--ruaok Freezerburn! All else is only icing. -- Soul Coughing
Robert Kaye -- robert nospam at moon.eorbit.net http://moon.eorbit.net/~robert