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: <87vc9pgklc.fsf@wolfjaw.dfranke.us>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 20:26:23 -0500
From: Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@...il.com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] Coding of the in[inlen] array for PHS( )

Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> writes:

> Yes, PHS() is defined to accept inlen, but in many scripting languages
> and in many other APIs NULs may be problematic anyway.
>
> Should PHS() support embedded NULs even when the password hashing
> scheme's primary implementation - one intended for actual use - does not
> support embedded NULs?  Well, perhaps it should...

Does there exist a scripting language that's so broken with respect to
dealing with embedded nulls that it's unreasonable for us to expect the
primary implementation of our scheme to deal with them properly?