phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] The best of the best, IMO

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2014 10:49:13 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] The best of the best, IMO

Jeremi,

On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 11:40:07PM -0700, Jeremi Gosney wrote:
> On 4/12/2014 11:36 PM, Solar Designer wrote:
> > In other words, Pufferfish is primarily for native code implementations,
> > and battcrypt is primarily for scripting languages with native Blowfish.
> >
> > Jeremi, Steve - are the above correct summaries?
> 
> Yep, I'd say that is an accurate summation.

Great.  Now, a way battcrypt might win over Pufferfish anyway is if we
determine that it performs better even when both are compiled to native
code (defensive).  This will take some testing, for both defense and
attack.  Are you doing this sort of testing? :-)

Alexander