HW 3 Graded!

[goodtaeeun]

안녕하세요,
세번째 과제가 마감되었고 채점되었습니다!
여러분의 점수는 KLMS의 "3. Mini-SHA" 과제를 통해서 확인하실 수 있습니다.

오늘 중으로 채점에 사용된 테스트를 푸쉬해드릴 예정이니 참고해주시기 바랍니다.

Gradescope의 성적과 달리 KLMS의 점수가 0점인 학생들이 몇몇 있을 것입니다. 다음 중 하나에 해당하는 경우입니다.

• GitHub ID 미제출
• 해시 충돌을 일으키는 입력쌍 하드코딩

참고하시기 바랍니다.

---

Hi all,
HW 3 is graded.
You can check your grade in KLMS assignment "3. Mini-SHA".

We’ll also push the evaluation test cases to your individual repositories.

A few students may see a score of 0 in KLMS despite having a valid score on Gradescope. These cases fall into one of the following categories:

• GitHub ID was not submitted
• The submission contains hard-coded hash collision input pairs

[Zo-ZerOs]

I want to carify my point and reconsider about my case.

Initially, I submitted my code that implemented all required functions except for crack32 (including SHA.hash256, SHA.hash32, HMAC.mac, and Word.add). That submission passed all test cases and received 90 out of 100 on Gradescope, with only crack marked as incorrect. Then, I continue focused on crack32 function. While working on it, I was not sure about the expected return type. I attempted to return a tuple that may not have followed the precise format stated in the instructions, but I believed the type was correct. I do not know why, this attempt resulted in a full score of 100, and I genuinely thought it was a valid edge case or even an intentionally hidden solution.

I would like to emphasize that I did not hard-code any hash collision input pairs in my submission. My intention was to solve the problem about return type. Given the nature of this course—where understanding and even exploiting weaknesses in systems is part of the learning objective—I assumed that using creative solutions would be acceptable, as long as they stayed within the spirit of the assignment.

[KihongHeo]

See my comments in the thread.

This is not the level expected at KAIST. I think all the instructions are clear in README, "You will implement the function...". I expect every student to clearly read the statement and not to take a shortcut. This is also a part of evaluation and education.

This decision will not change. Hope you understand.

[Zo-ZerOs]

This is my pleasure to talk with you, Professor KihongHeo. I understand that my hard-coding is not the level expected at KAIST. Moreover, in the instruction, it stated clearly that I should make a function. I cannot disagree with you on that point. I sincerely apologize for my mistake and take full responsibility for that part by receive a 0 on crack function.

However, my point is for the other part that I coded by myself and tried to match with the level expected at KAIST. Why they are also scored as 0?

[Zo-ZerOs]

I would like to raise one case that similar to this and better illustrates my perspective.

Let say that I was doing the exam and I do not fully know what is the answer for question 42 (just random number). It means that I am not match the level expected at KAIST for the question number 42. However, I still have a chance to quess an answer for that question. I might answer it incorrectly but for the rest if I answer them correct, I should get those score.

Same as this assignment. Let treat my hard-codeing as that I do not how to answer and provide the correct solution for crack function. So, I am not match the level expected at KAIST for that crack function. Howeveer, I still have a chacne to provide a guess answer. I might be wrong for that answer. However, I think I should receive the score for the rest that I did it by myself and they are correct.

[KihongHeo]

No. I view this as cheating.

Originally, I was going to give an F, but after discussing with the TAs, we decided to give a zero only for this assignment. I hope you understand. I wish you the best in the remaining time and hope you achieve good results.

[Zo-ZerOs]

Thank you very much for your consideration. If the original decision was to assign an F, but you have instead decided to give a 0 for this particular assignment, I truly appreciate your leniency. I will do my best in the future assignments and exam.

I also have one sincere question regarding the use of the word “cheating". I would like to better understand why my action—submitting a guess answer to check the return type—could be considered cheating. My intention was not to deceive, but I now realize that it may have been interpreted differently.

I ask this only to better understand and reflect, so I can avoid making similar mistakes in the future.