Which CRC extension option is better: filename.sha3 or filename.txt.sha3?

1

Hi

Which CRC extension option is better: filename.sha3 or filename.txt.sha3 ?

Please help

2

Hello and welcome to the community, @PiotrMP006! :wave:

Both options can work well, and the choice between them may depend on your specific use case and personal preference.

Using “filename.sha3” as the extension would indicate that the file contains the SHA3 hash value of the original file, and not the original file itself. This approach can be useful when you want to store the hash value separately from the original file. For example, you might use this approach to verify the integrity of a file after transferring it over the internet. In this case, you would generate the hash value of the file at the source, and then compare it to the hash value of the received file to ensure that they match.

On the other hand, using “filename.txt.sha3” as the extension would indicate that the file contains both the original file and its SHA3 hash value. This approach can be useful when you want to keep the original file and its hash value together in a single file.

3

if it’s the sha3sum of filename.txt, then filename.txt.sha3. if it’s the sha3sum of filename, then filename.sha3

imo

1 Like
4

This topic was automatically closed 180 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.