Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:96025 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 64535 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2016 22:36:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 17 Sep 2016 22:36:48 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=yohgaki@ohgaki.net; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=yohgaki@ohgaki.net; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ohgaki.net designates 180.42.98.130 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: yohgaki@ohgaki.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 180.42.98.130 ns1.es-i.jp Received: from [180.42.98.130] ([180.42.98.130:50454] helo=es-i.jp) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 0E/63-19521-975CDD75 for ; Sat, 17 Sep 2016 18:36:47 -0400 Received: (qmail 42900 invoked by uid 89); 17 Sep 2016 22:36:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-qk0-f174.google.com) (yohgaki@ohgaki.net@209.85.220.174) by 0 with ESMTPA; 17 Sep 2016 22:36:37 -0000 Received: by mail-qk0-f174.google.com with SMTP id z190so118319862qkc.3 for ; Sat, 17 Sep 2016 15:36:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwOoaNB+mnThhhXBICYd92aXKe5KhRdB/Iyuf5cCe3JwmjxW+BDkV7fnoaTBoSsbATxLCP6onDsQDv1mUg== X-Received: by 10.55.165.135 with SMTP id o129mr22827201qke.196.1474151791289; Sat, 17 Sep 2016 15:36:31 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.84.168 with HTTP; Sat, 17 Sep 2016 15:35:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <7d5727ba-da33-e3c5-1d1f-318c45d81616@cubiclesoft.com> Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 07:35:50 +0900 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: Stanislav Malyshev Cc: Scott Arciszewski , Thomas Hruska , PHP Internals Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] HashDoS From: yohgaki@ohgaki.net (Yasuo Ohgaki) Hi all, On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 5:13 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: >> Significant degradation? >> >> SipHash 1-3 is almost as fast as HashDoS-vulnerable hash >> functions: https://github.com/funny-falcon/funny_hash > > I see on this link comparison to Murmur3 - but that's not the function > we are using. Is there a comparison to PHP one? Unfortunately, SipHash was a lot slower. BJB hash is simple and super fast, even google's CityHash was a lot slower when I tested. (Sorry I don't keep the number) I think we are better to limit max collisions. I'm +1 for Nikita's proposal does this. Regards, -- Yasuo Ohgaki yohgaki@ohgaki.net