phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] Proposed timeline changes

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: <52C97D23.5010400@uni-weimar.de>
Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2014 16:41:23 +0100
From: Christian Forler <christian.forler@...-weimar.de>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] Proposed timeline changes

On 05.01.2014 03:19, Solar Designer wrote:
[...]
> So, yes, at least escrypt and Catena teams would like a chance to submit
> revised and/or different versions (beyond mere "tweaks"), where
> influence by other submissions (which we can't possibly see all of
> before the round 1 submission deadline, whatever it is) might play a
> major role.  For example, I might like some aspects of new Catena so
> much that I'd want them in a major revision of escrypt (beyond tweaks),
> yet not like the new Catena as much as to choose it over escrypt almost
> as-is (with mere tweaks to Catena).

I just revised the eprint paper. Happy reading :-)

Furthermore, I just created a new github repo for the Catena reference
implementation (https://github.com/cforler/catena).

We appreciate any optimized implementation of Catena, or any other kind
of constructive contribution. Volunteers are welcome. :-)

Best regards,
Christian


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (552 bytes)