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  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: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 17:41:15 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] scripting memory (not so) high

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 07:50:45AM -0500, Bill Cox wrote:
> The case of PHP is interesting, but this is of course server-side only, at
> least in cases I'm aware of.  I'd love to see a Javascript optimized
> memory-hard KDF.  Especially in client-side Javascript, I'd worry less
> about timing attacks and focus on memory filling speed and sequential
> hardness.

As I mentioned in another posting, JavaScript is equally slow or fast
(depending on its implementation) for standard primitives such as
SHA-512 (which it lacks) and less usual ones such as EksBlowfish.  The
latter currently provide huge advantage against GPUs, especially when
total memory usage is not high (lower than tens of MB) - and we might
not have time to use a lot of memory.  Thus, a JavaScript optimized KDF
may be quite different from a PHP/Perl/Python/... optimized one.  Yes,
this is unfortunate, since it would otherwise be preferable to have
fewer different KDFs in use.

> A server running Drupal or any PHP back-end can almost always call a
> process in C to do key stretching.  I believe this is a better architecture
> anyway.  It's one thing to worry about memory leaking between processes,
> and another to worry about leaking to all those unaudited PHP libraries
> that get sucked into Drupal or any other popular back end.  I want my key
> derivation performed in a process where we can check the code and believe
> it is secure.

This can't possibly be the default setup of future Drupal, nor any other
popular web app.  Whatever password hashing scheme they'd use would need
to be purely PHP.

> Any chance we'd get to see a Java translation?

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 07:51:27AM -0500, Bill Cox wrote:
> s/Java translation/Javascript translation/

Of smhkdf?  Not at this time, or not by me.

For JavaScript, maybe a translation of a future revision of escrypt
would be more appropriate.  BTW, Dmitry Chestnykh has JavaScript
implementations of scrypt (and benchmark results in different browsers,
which IIRC required different optimizations).

Alexander

Powered by blists - more mailing lists