How can they get away with not storing at least a second hash? I don't see how an all-caps password can be matched to an any cased password, unless you only store the hash to the all-caps password.
Note that this behavior is OS specific. Windows will invert case (shift gives lowercase), while macOS will be all-caps (shift doesn't do anything).
Frankly I can't remember the Windows approach ever being useful to me, and more often than not it bites me in the ass because I habitually hit something like shift-i to type "I" and end up with a lowercase i instead.
Drafters (the guys who draw engineering drawings) love it because you very rarely but just enough have to type lowercase letters (such as units, like 3mm) whilst all other text must be in capitals. Thus, you just use shift to shift it to lowercase for those rare moments and no other times.
Thanks! Case inverted makes sense. They can invert the case before hashing and submitting. If any of the four hashes match the stored hash, they get in.
I think what was meant was that they don’t store a second hash in order to allow chopping off a character at the end. I agree with you that they would need to store extra hashes for allowing all-caps and some of the other cases.
No extra hashes needed for an all caps version or inverted case version of a password, just perform those transformations on the user input, hash, and compare the result to the single stored hash.
I really like the animation too. But I'm wondering why they chose to make a collage of movie posters if the search is for tv shows. Awesome nonetheless.
Looks nice. There seems to be a bug with the movie titles though. I clicked the top 50 and most of the torrent links for the movie Safe were actually for the movie Safe House.
Great list. I'd like to mention I use Tower app for a Git GUI. I especially like that it shows a diff right as you're looking at changes and lets you stage chunks of code which I find very helpful.
I've used Gitx, SourceTree, and Tower each for more than a week exclusively. So far, Tower by far comes the closest in most features. One key feature for me was being able to easily switch between commit-list view and file-browse view (the latter to get to a file and view its history). I haven't tried Gitbox, because based on their feature list, it doesn't even come close to SourceTree, which in turn had less features than Tower.
One of my biggest problems is that all of these programs seem to emphasize pushing, pulling, merging, rebasing, etc. But I don't want any of that stuff, the command line is awesome for all that. I just want to search, browse, and compare commits a bit more easily.
There are a few small things Tower is still missing, but the Tower team have been really responsive and receptive to implementing those changes when I talked to them (which I think is a benefit of actually having to pay for the app).
A slip of the keyboard. Obviously if they received $1 million in funding, the team is smart enough to choose how they live. I'm just saying, it probably wouldn't burn through their funding if they hired a maid to come in occasionally. :)
