phc-discussions - RE: [PHC] How important is salting really?

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: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 14:25:22 -0800
From: "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@....org>
To: <discussions@...sword-hashing.net>
Subject: RE: [PHC] How important is salting really?

 --Responding to--
From: epixoip [mailto:epixoip@...dshell.nl] 
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 13:10
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] How important is salting really?

[ ... ]

It's not just about indexing by salt, though. You still have to maintain
a list of salts to hash each plaintext candidate with, and remove salts
from said list when a salt is eliminated. Regardless of how you do it,
it is the number of salts, not the number of hashes, that slows down a
cracking job. Unless you are working with very large lists on AMD GPUs,
but that's a whole nother can of worms.

<orcnote>
   I believe there is no need for the defender to maintain an index of 
   used salts (although they are stored with the hash values somewhere).  
   One can use a counter or any other systematically-unique segment,
   Combined with a random portion, whenever a new salt is generated.
   One can then focus on the mechanism by which the systematic portion
   is prevented from ever producing a duplicate and also never running
   out for some foreseeable lifetime. 

   In this way, the adversary has to deal with each salt||hash combo as
   unique, with no opportunity to exploit duplications.
</orcnote>