phc-discussions - RE: [PHC] Testing Password Hashing functions

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <218AE73F98E99C4C98AF7D5166AA798E09079F64@TK5EX14MBXC287.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 18:53:18 +0000
From: Marsh Ray <maray@...rosoft.com>
To: "discussions@...sword-hashing.net" <discussions@...sword-hashing.net>
Subject: RE: [PHC] Testing Password Hashing functions

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew Green [mailto:matthewdgreen@...il.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 5, 2013 10:50 AM
> To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
> Subject: Re: [PHC] Testing Password Hashing functions
> 
> Formally, the right tool here is to ask for a proof that the construction is
> indifferentiable from a random oracle -- assuming that the building blocks
> (underlying hash functions, block ciphers, etc.) also meet similar criteria.
> 
> The submitters don't have to write this proof, but it would be one of the
> criteria for analysis. Since most of these functions will probably be based on
> 'standard' building blocks, this shouldn't be an enormous stretch.

The changes between PBKDF1 and PBKDF2 are interesting WRT differentiability-from-RO, particularly length extension and image shrinkage.

- Marsh