Integrity check of Prime95 archive?

[Prime95]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

I figured a general "Windows XP and up" for the 64-bit and "Windows 95 and up" for 32-bit would suffice... no reason to specify each and every Windows iteration unless it actually didn't work on any of them for some reason.

I'd shorten it even more: Windows 64-bit and Windows 32-bit.

One idea - maybe good, maybe not - move older OSes to the end of the table or in a separate table. These include: pre-Mavericks Mac, FreeBSD before version 10, others?

[ET_]

Originally Posted by Prime95

I'd shorten it even more: Windows 64-bit and Windows 32-bit.

One idea - maybe good, maybe not - move older OSes to the end of the table or in a separate table. These include: pre-Mavericks Mac, FreeBSD before version 10, others?

I was a happy user of PrimeOS2...

[Mark Rose]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

Try this on for size... I don't know if people generally prefer SHA1 or MD5 so I added both, but I don't know if it makes the table too busy. I also cleaned up the OS descriptions a bit... I figured a general "Windows XP and up" for the 64-bit and "Windows 95 and up" for 32-bit would suffice... no reason to specify each and every Windows iteration unless it actually didn't work on any of them for some reason.

Download page - TEST version

MD5 has been broken since 2009. SHA1 was broken in February. There are known algorithms for making files with matching signatures.

SHA256 is still secure.

[Dubslow]

Originally Posted by Mark Rose

MD5 has been broken since 2009. SHA1 was broken in February. There are known algorithms for making files with matching signatures.

SHA256 is still secure.

That was my first thought is that regardless of what people actually prefer, they shouldn't prefer either. Indeed SHA256 is a good choice at this point in time.

[Madpoo]

Originally Posted by Dubslow

That was my first thought is that regardless of what people actually prefer, they shouldn't prefer either. Indeed SHA256 is a good choice at this point in time.

Whatever people are used to. I'll admit, I don't check signatures when downloading stuff so I haven't paid much attention to what's what lately.

EDIT: Switched to just SHA256

[Madpoo]

Originally Posted by Prime95

I'd shorten it even more: Windows 64-bit and Windows 32-bit.

One idea - maybe good, maybe not - move older OSes to the end of the table or in a separate table. These include: pre-Mavericks Mac, FreeBSD before version 10, others?

I reshuffled the order and just went with 64/32 bitness for Windows. We could separate the newer/older stuff in that table somehow or put the legacy stuff in a different place entirely.

EDIT: and... done. George/James: If you look in the code for that page don't laugh at how I hacked in a table row like that.

[WaiCeeh]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

Download page - TEST version

Very nice.

Another way is to create a file for every archive with the extension sha256 that contains the hash and filename. For example:

p95v2810.linux64.tar.gz.sha256

ed5a8b94fdd65436e98e57ea0838035fd44c62492009d00f5fba508cb85481c7  p95v2810.linux64.tar.gz

This could be done automatically by integrating a script in your packing process. The benefits are that the format is standardized so the sha256 checking program will compare the hashes for you. Also, when new versions of Prime95 are released, the sha256 checksums for older versions are still available on the server.

On the download page the sha256 file could be linked in the "Download" column like this:

p95v2810.linux64.tar.gz (sha256)

However, this is just a suggestion.

[Xyzzy]

Originally Posted by WaiCeeh

Another way is to create a file for every archive with the extension sha256 that contains the hash and filename.

Example:

https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/d.../amd64/iso-cd/