phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] TigerPHS paper and code ready for review

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: <CAOLP8p5WV3bY5_B3=TLMuXhSP2wFMytFf0s+v_e_XM36xoOiKg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 21:44:51 -0400
From: Bill Cox <waywardgeek@...il.com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] TigerPHS paper and code ready for review

Grr... naming is so hard.  We still need to help Alexander find a name
as good or better than Escrypt that he wont get sued over.  NoelPHS?
How about TwoCats?

Bill

On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Donghoon Chang <pointchang@...il.com> wrote:
> One small comment: In 1995 the name Tiger was already used as a hash
> algorithm designed by Anderson and Biham. (See the following link.)
>
> http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_(cryptography)
>
> - donghoon
>
> 2014년 3월 12일 수요일, Jean-Philippe Aumasson<jeanphilippe.aumasson@...il.com>님이
> 작성한 메시지:
>
>> You may just call it Tiger, we'll figure out that as a PHC submission
>> it's a PHS ;-)
>>
>> Well there's already a hash function called Tiger, and there's also a
>> Tiger2, so maybe not a good idea:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_(cryptography)
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 9:43 PM, Bill Cox <waywardgeek@...il.com> wrote:
>>> Based on a lot of excellent feedback, I've updated TigerKDF, which I'm
>>> now calling TigerPHS, for Password Hashing Scheme rather than Key
>>> Derivation Function.  The latest version of my paper is at:
>>>
>>> http://waywardgeek.net/TigerPHS.pdf
>>>
>>> Code can be viewed/cloned at:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/waywardgeek/tigerphs
>>>
>>> I've updated the benchmarks based on Alexander's feedback.
>>>
>>> After the excellent discussion on PBKDF2 and HKDF, I've switched from
>>> PBKDF2-BLAKE2S to HKDF-SHA256 for initial and final key derivation,
>>> with Blake2s still used in the memory hashing part.  Every input other
>>> than stopMemCost is now hashed in the initial hkdfExtract, conforming
>>> to the author's description of how to do a "strongly secure" key
>>> derivation.
>>>
>>> I've reduce the number of "slices" from 16 to 4, as per Solar
>>> Designer's recommendation.
>>>
>>> The paper has been improved as well.
>>>
>>> Let me know what you think.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Bill
>>