We need a different word besides "Local Hashing", we need a word that fits the description better, and that isn't cheesey.  Any ideas?

Non-Remote Hashing

Local CD-Key and Password algorithms.

[quote author=R.a.B.B.i.T link=topic=10188.msg95148#msg95148 date=1105667200]
Local CD-Key and Password algorithms.
[/quote]

Better

I don't see what's cheesy about "local hashing" -- it's fairly accurate and concise..

[quote author=BaDDBLooD link=topic=10188.msg95139#msg95139 date=1105666616]
We need a different word besides "Local Hashing", we need a word that fits the description better, and that isn't cheesey.  Any ideas?
[/quote]

Why do we need one?

i don't know, i just thought there might be a *better* phrase, than that.

I Sort of ran out of things to say, so i just rambled a bit...

It depends on the client, really.

On Starcraft/wc2/d2, you could say it's decoded then hashed, because it IS hashed.
On Starcraft/wc2/d2, you could say that your password is hashed, because it IS hashed.
On War3, the cdkey is decoded then hashed.
On War3 the passwords are encrypted into verifiers, then sent.

As you can see, it's mostly hashed.  So that's a good name for it.

local checksumming

[quote author=iago link=topic=10188.msg95177#msg95177 date=1105677448]
It depends on the client, really.

On Starcraft/wc2/d2, you could say it's decoded then hashed, because it IS hashed.
On Starcraft/wc2/d2, you could say that your password is hashed, because it IS hashed.
On War3, the cdkey is decoded then hashed.
On War3 the passwords are encrypted into verifiers, then sent.

As you can see, it's mostly hashed.  So that's a good name for it.
[/quote]

What about when people say, for example, "where can I download the Starcraft hashes".  Doesn't make any sense, but we all know it means Starcraft.exe, Battle.snp, Storm.dll...

I've never quite understood why the files required to calculate the version info for a given client came to be associated with hashing, since no hash is generated based on those files.

I guess saying "hash files" is easier than saying "required files for version checksum," but it's rather inaccurate.

However, there is nothing wrong with the term "local hashing," since there is quite a bit of hashing that does occur during logon. It just is separate from the version calculations.

[quote author=Zakath link=topic=10188.msg95267#msg95267 date=1105755772]
I've never quite understood why the files required to calculate the version info for a given client came to be associated with hashing, since no hash is generated based on those files.

I guess saying "hash files" is easier than saying "required files for version checksum," but it's rather inaccurate.

However, there is nothing wrong with the term "local hashing," since there is quite a bit of hashing that does occur during logon. It just is separate from the version calculations.
[/quote]Actually, if you think about it, both "hash" and "checksum" are the same thing: they take either a string or an executable file, turn it into a number, and turn the number down into a much smaller number by doing things to the number with itself (and sometimes other constants as well).