Checksum. A value used to ensure data are stored or transmitted without error. It is created by calculating the binary values in a block of data using some algorithm and storing the results with the data. For example, a basic checksum may simply be the number of bytes in a file. However, this type of checksum is not very reliable since two or more bytes could be switched around, causing the data to be different, though the checksum would be the same. Therefore, more advanced checksum algorithms are typically used to verify data. These include cyclic redundancy check (“CRC”) algorithms and cryptographic hash algorithms.
Checksum. Checksum shall be employed to determine the presence of errors during transmission or handling of messages. The checksum shall be a 4-byte unsigned integer and calculated by simple, byte-wise unsigned binary addition of all data contained in the message excluding the checksum, and truncated to four bytes. ANNEX B to STANAG 4586 Edition 2
Checksum. A checksum should be stored in order to easily verify the validity of each replica. The specific checksum algorithm is not imposed by EUDAT – that is left up to each community. There are no other restrictions or requirements imposed on the PID record.
Checksum. The unique string calculated with the use of a MD5 algoritm to verify the file's integrity. This value can be auto-generated by the SOR.
Checksum. To mitigate a small part of this problem, a checksum will be added as a field to the medical supply object. This checksum is a hash of the object’s information and will only be initiated at the time a medical supply has been issued by a Regulator. Whenever a transaction occurs that affects such a medical supply, before being submitted the checksum will be used to verify the contents have not been tampered with by comparing it to a recalculated checksum. Anonymity Furthermore, the identities of the users can be known, therefore it is best for them to be anonymous. Hyperledger Xxxxxx already provides a built-in function for the smart contract to get a hashed identity of the smart contract invoker (peer). Nonetheless, the function is not very useful for the prototype as certain functions allow for its users to provide a name themselves (for example for using a pseudo name). Here it is thus not viable to expect the customers and regulators to fill in a hashed version of their enrolled identity. So instead of purely relying on the Hyperledger Xxxxxx’s hashed identity, the TPM is going to be used to hash the provided names within the smart contract. As other blockchain applications might not have access to the in-built function like Hyperledger Fabric does or want to authenticate their users in a different way, this can serve as an example to show how TPM can be used as an alternative option.
