phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] Computational comparison of 3 schemes...

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: <CAOLP8p7kZE37NJ8cr978rO4TZ3NHAKPYCXZ1bddtD1aA4_SD0w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 08:45:57 -0500
From: Bill Cox <waywardgeek@...il.com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] Computational comparison of 3 schemes...

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 8:02 AM, Christian Forler
<christian.forler@...-weimar.de> wrote:
> Your are welcome to fork Catena. I add you as a Collaborator. So feel
> free to add an optimized version of Catena.

Thanks!  I'll make a waywardgeek branch where I can thrash the code
without impacting master.  There are several things I want to try,
including the faster hash function, and larger block sizes.  I also
want to see what can be done for useful parallelism.  It may make
sense to run Catena-3 on GPUs in the future on purpose, for example,
and we'll never reach the kinds of memory bandwidth Alexander obtains
without more parallelism.

Bill