phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] A silly (?) consideration for script-friendly hashes

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: <557E4057-6519-4B61-938D-7B632C00528E@mac.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 14:20:37 -0800
From: Larry Bugbee <bugbee@....com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] A silly (?) consideration for script-friendly hashes

On Jan 24, 2014, at 2:17 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Larry Bugbee <bugbee@....com> wrote:
>> On Jan 24, 2014, at 2:13 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> just hash the domain in
>>> with the salt before using it to hash a password
>> 
>> Good idea, but why not also add userid?
>> 
>> 
> 
> Because then you need some kind of trusted input so that scripts can't
> just fake the userid.  

Sorry, and perhaps I'm dense, but I don't see why that's a problem.


> At that point, you might as well try to use a
> protocol like SRP instead.
> 
> --Andy