phc-discussions - integer multiply was not always constant-time

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: <20140304224149.GA13082@openwall.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 02:41:49 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: integer multiply was not always constant-time

BTW, let's not forget that even MUL/IMUL were not constant time on 486
and prior (and it's similar on similarly old non-x86 archs).  So if we
care about being timing-safe even on CPUs this old, we should probably
avoid multiplication in the portion where we avoid cache timing leaks.

Alexander