phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] Upgrade HKDF to HKDF2?

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: <CAOLP8p7KV9BLVn-B5jAuGOO4aNpLDowrmq8b5zPBV_HBD1z4ng@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:04:26 -0400
From: Bill Cox <waywardgeek@...il.com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] Upgrade HKDF to HKDF2?

I have converted TigerPHS (as I'm now calling it) to use the reference
version of HKDF-SHA256.  It's better than I thought.  For one thing,
it has an API for adding multiple sets of key data, so I can add user
supplied "data" there.  I like the API, and I think I'll add a similar
API to TigerPHS in case a user has multiple pieces of "data" he'd like
to add.

The only issues I still see with HKDF are minor:

1) Output length limited to 255*32 (for SHA256).  Not perfect, but I
can live with it.
2) No padding on sensitive inputs, and it relies on the underlying
hash function for that.  However, I can recommend to users that they
have a fixed max password, like 256 bytes, zero it initially, and pass
the whole thing to my PHS.  That's more work for the user, but it's
even more secure than a pad.

Bill