phc-discussions - RE: [PHC] Coding of the in[inlen] array for PHS( )

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]

Message-ID: <000901ce0e2a$b1f371e0$15da55a0$@acm.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 14:52:55 -0800
From: "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@....org>
To: <discussions@...sword-hashing.net>
Subject: RE: [PHC] Coding of the in[inlen] array for PHS( )

Good.

A cryptographically-random byte sequence or two would also be useful for
test vectors. 

My view is that PHS( ) should not interpret the sequence as any character
code whatsoever.  Nothing to mishandle.

 - Dennis 

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Franke [mailto:dfoxfranke@...il.com] 
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 14:12
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] Coding of the in[inlen] array for PHS( )

"Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@....org> writes:

> The ASCII/non-ASCII about desirable test vectors suggest that being
> character set sensitive is permissible.

I don't think it suggests that at all.  The purpose of test vectors is
to check the correctness of implementations.  One plausible way to mess
up an otherwise-correct implementation is to mishandle inputs containing
non-ASCII characters. Therefore non-ASCII test vectors are desirable.

I would amend the recommendation by explicit calling for some test
vectors containing embedded null bytes.