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  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: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 15:41:59 -0500
From: Jeffrey Goldberg <>
Subject: Re: [PHC] Terminology goals

On 2013-08-20, at 3:14 PM, Marsh Ray <> wrote:
> Since an authentication scheme for password-based credentials has a subtly different set of security properties than general hashing, message digesting, MACing, and even key derivation, we should strongly consider giving it a different name.

Please! I'm tired of putting scare-quotes around "hash" every time I write about this. One of our goals is to make things easier services to do things properly. I still remember the people complaining that BLAKE2 was bad because it was too fast. Separate terms will help make it clear that different things have different design goals.

> The values derived from the generate function. For example, we could call it a “pash function” or “pash values”, which you could think of as “Password Authentication ScHeme” or just “Password Hash”.

Nice. I think I might start using that terminology right away. I don't think we need to wait for contest results to start doing this.

(I'd also like something for KDFs that are designed to have a work factor for when the function output isn't for authentication.  "k-desh" for "Key Derivation ScHeme"? But as this the the PHC project and not the KDF-C project, my additional wishes here are off-topic.)



Powered by blists - more mailing lists