
Show HN: Funny, Human-Memorable SHA-256 Fingerprints - eneuman
https://madhash.telekinesis.cloud/
======
ketralnis
See also rfc1751[1] which I use in a project[2] to make human readable
fingerprints like this:

    
    
        === secrets.vm ===
        common name: secrets.vm
        fingerprint: b957e10c998faa9909cff3ba4ec35485d04708c3ecc7481fe14d7f07bc0229cd
        public key:  c15e697e4807793ef8a9461a7b2c6cf2266d1ec1480a594e83b54e7b75e07702
        public sign: f1db594eb55fe97657c57f2aa01afd1210a46d42d80d5552ac4d548162d4968e
        mnemonic:    AM ROBE KIT OMEN BATE ICY TROY RON WHAT HIP OMIT SUP LID CLAY AVER LEAR CAVE REEL CAN PAM FAN LUND RIFT ACME
        does that look right? [y/n]
    

[1]:
[https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1751](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1751)
[2]:
[https://github.com/ketralnis/secrets](https://github.com/ketralnis/secrets)

~~~
captn3m0
I like the Telegram safety feature where they use Emojis as fingerprints.

~~~
Jaxkr
Yeah, it’s very clever. Packs a lot more bytes into few characters.

------
smiley1437
My disappointment is immeasurable that I can't put in a Madhash and get the
SHA-256 back ;)

~~~
eneuman
I am so sorry, I'll do it tomorrow!

------
dependenttypes
I do not get it. How are black, white, and western offensive?
[https://github.com/e-neuman/madhash/blob/master/offensive.tx...](https://github.com/e-neuman/madhash/blob/master/offensive.txt)

Anyway, this is kinda similar to
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PGP_word_list](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PGP_word_list)

~~~
eneuman
The words aren't offensive, but the output sentences might be, so why risk it?

I appreciate the reference to the PGP word list, I didn't know about it.

One thing MadHash adds is a bit of structure in the form of <adjective> <noun>
<adverb> <verb> <adjective> <noun> which should help make the phrases more
memorable.

Also, each sentence covers 64 bits, whereas the PGP word list covers just 2
bits per word.

~~~
londons_explore
Having generated user passwords with dictionary[random()] a few times, I can
tell you you will get angry users moaning about the fact you defaulted their
password to "You Fat Pig", or "Dumb Looks".

A surprising percentage of random combinations of innocuous words can be found
offensive by someone, and automatic filtering is pretty much impossible.

~~~
paledot
At work I briefly experimented with naming releases deterministically based on
the git hash and a common words list. I generated 20 random 3-word phrases as
a quick proof of concept, and 3 of the 20 were easily construed as sexually
suggestive.

I filed a bug report with the English language, but it was rejected.

------
curryhoward
Another implementation of this idea:
[https://www.huffgram.com/](https://www.huffgram.com/)

------
beagle3
Relevant:
[https://web.archive.org/web/20090918202746/http://tothink.co...](https://web.archive.org/web/20090918202746/http://tothink.com/mnemonic/wordlist.html)

------
zedgerman
Neat idea!

Btw: Consider renaming your list of offensive terms “denylist” or similar.

~~~
asdkhadsj
What's the reasoning here? _(not challenging you, just want to make sure I
understand your thought process)_.

I imagine it's something to do with the fact that some of the words won't be
"offensive" by themselves, or perhaps even at all by all people. So naming it
deny disassociates the reason from the word? Ie sometimes the word itself is
offensive, sometimes it's fine but part of offensive combinations, etc etc?

