phc-discussions - RE: [PHC] Submission deadline extension (March 31)

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <008d01cf0b33$cbf03b30$63d0b190$@cfl.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 18:05:30 -0500
From: "Gary W. Hvizdak" <gary.hvizdak@....rr.com>
To: <discussions@...sword-hashing.net>
Subject: RE: [PHC] Submission deadline extension (March 31)

Hi JP,

    Thank you, thank you, thank you!  This is the wonderful news.

    And while I'm writing . currently I am debating the addition of yet
another formal parameter, but for the moment here's my public function's
prototype .

int PHC (
       void         * out,
       size_t         outlen,
       const void   * in,
       size_t         inlen,
       const void   * salt,
       size_t         saltlen,
       unsigned int   t_cost,
       unsigned int   m_cost,
       unsigned int * cost_t,   //  "effective" time-cost (optional)
       unsigned int * cost_m,   //  "effective" memory-cost (optional)
       unsigned int   lo_seed,  //  32-bit seed used to minimize
memory-cost's "time impact"
       unsigned int   hi_seed,  //  top half of 64-bit seed (as described
above)
       unsigned int   flags)    //  currently four flags are supported
(described below <> )

    The parameter I'm currently debating adding is "max_inlen".  Its purpose
would be to minimize time wasted in environments where the maximum password
length "ever expected" is considerably .LT. 128.  Thus allowing a
substantially higher time-cost parameter value - i.e. doing additional
calculating as opposed to just spinning our wheels - and thereby stronger
hashing.

Thanks,
Gary

P.S.  My "baby" is maturing nicely; below is a brief update feature list of
the current product ...

  _____  

*        Cost parameters are fairly independent, although memory costs above
1 MB have a rapidly increasing time-cost side effect, no doubt due to cache
misses.
o   Memory costs have been demonstrated up to 256 MB, at which point I get a
malloc() error.
*        Digest length can be any positive number.  (I have tested with all
lengths in the range 1 to 8192 bytes, i.e. from 8 to 65536 bits in 8-bit
increments!)
*        Favorable "avalanche effect" behavior.
*        Easy to comprehend algorithm based on just two primitives . . .
o   Arithmetic modulo.
o   Fisher-Yates shuffle.
*        A single (.c) source file supports 32- and 64-bit builds (via
conditionally included header files).
*        Build-time "force" and "prohibit" flag-overrides.  (Not yet
implemented!)
*        Flags . . .
o   RUN IN NEAR CONSTANT TIME
*  Thwarts timing side-channel attacks.  (See the preliminary plot below <>
.)
o   OBLITERATE WORKING MEMORY
*  Thwarts memory sniffer attacks.
o   INJECT REMAINDER FEEDBACK
*  Thwarts calculating all of the "password+salt" modulos in parallel via
GPUs, or custom hardware, i.e. ASIC, FPGA, etc.
*  Causes the calculation to run slightly slower.
*  May leak slightly more info to timing side-channel attackers.
*  Alters the digest.
o   RUN IN DEVELOPMENT MODE
*  Enables input validation and detailed "error" return codes.

:
:

(Note that the flag "designations" in the plot legend below, do not match
the flag names in the description above.)

X-axis is password + salt = total data length, Y-axis is time in mS
Test Case Parameters : 1X memory-cost; 5X time-cost; 32-byte digest
Title: Execution Time in mS vs. Password + Salt Length

  _____  

-----Original Message-----
From: Jean-Philippe Aumasson [mailto:jeanphilippe.aumasson@...il.com] 
Sent: Monday 06 Jan 2014 1124
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: [PHC] Submission deadline extension (March 31)

The submission deadline extension of PHC is extended to March 31.

This has been announced

* on the website  <https://password-hashing.net/call.html>
https://password-hashing.net/call.html
 <https://password-hashing.net/timeline.html>
https://password-hashing.net/timeline.html

* on Twitter  <https://twitter.com/veorq/status/420225439710212097>
https://twitter.com/veorq/status/420225439710212097

* in my Dagstuhl talk of today
 <https://131002.net/data/talks/norxphc_dagstuhl14.pdf>
https://131002.net/data/talks/norxphc_dagstuhl14.pdf

We hope this will increase the quality and quantity of submissions to
PHC, and that it will eventually benefit the project.

Content of type "text/html" skipped

Download attachment "image002.png" of type "image/png" (121969 bytes)