cuid2 VS btcutil

The CUID readme [1] explains that there's no real point to K-sortable on modern hardware:

[1] https://github.com/paralleldrive/cuid2?tab=readme-ov-file#no...

There's a comparison in the README of the project:

https://github.com/paralleldrive/cuid2#the-contenders

Some of the arguments mentioned are explained elsewhere in the README, others are assumed.

One argument standing out for me is the lack of collision-resistance for UUIDv4 which is surprising for me and I didn't spot any sources for that argument.

Another argument is the entropy source where they go about that Math.random is not reliable as a single entropy source but glimpsing at the source code, they sprinkle the CUID with Math.random data.

I am no expert in ID security, so I am not qualified to speak about the validity of their arguments, only that there's insufficient information to validate without prior knowledge about the problem domain.

I'm recently finding cuid2 to be the best of these alternative GUIDs. They seem to have all of the benefits for what you would want to use a GUID for, but none of the drawbacks of existing implementations.[1]

[1]: https://github.com/paralleldrive/cuid2#the-contenders

I've just released v2.0.0 of my cuid2 python port. The original cuid2 package comes from JS world by ParallelDrive. They have a lot of the reasons to use Cuid2 posted in their repo, including

I recently wrote a Go implementation of CUID2 because I could not find an existing one. It is not hello-world, but it is not duff's device either, which by the way neither could explain what it did from just the raw code in isolation.

I think this implementation is the original one. It has the following to say about why it exists. And what it is good for:

There's also https://github.com/paralleldrive/cuid2 which likely should be added to this as it is likely one of the better ones out there now.

If you're using prisma then you can use CUID or CUID2 to manually generate it.

Your IDs are []byte of len=11. Those bytes can be represented in many ways.

You can represent them as hex strings via encoding/hex.EncodeToString(id), or base64 strings via encoding/base64.StdEncoding.EncodeToString(id), or base32 strings via encoding/base32.StdEncoding.EncodeToString(id), or etc.

Looks like the most used base58 package is https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/btcsuite/btcutil/base58, but looking at the implementation [0] I'm not impressed, and confident there's a better implementation

[0] https://github.com/btcsuite/btcutil/blob/v1.0.2/base58/base5...

But how you encode 11 bytes of data is kind of orthogonal to the important thing, which is that you have 11 bytes of data. They should be always be store in memory (in your application, or a DB, or anything else) as the actual 11 bytes of the ID, and not as a base58 or base64 or JSON or whatever other kind of string that can be decoded to the actual 11 bytes of data.

Likewise, a UUID shouldn't be stored as a string like "64d3f2e0-a4dc-48d3-98ad-7f09eb3b082f", that's a specific encoding of the actual 16 UUID bytes, you should store, process, etc. those bytes directly.

Golang: https://github.com/btcsuite/btcutil