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  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]
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 18:13:11 +0400
From: Solar Designer <>
Subject: Re: [PHC] Can I have two entries?

On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 01:49:39PM +0100, Thomas Pornin wrote:
> I'd say that what matters is how "different" the entries are from each
> other. Authorship is mostly irrelevant.

I fully agree with this, and with the rest of what you said in this
message.  Thank you!

> As a final note, I must state that the final packaging, where you put
> together the specification and reference code and test vectors, and
> adjust all the details so that the specification is clear and readable
> and the code works well and is portable, that final stretch implies a
> substantial amount of effort and time, and is often underestimated(*). I
> write these lines on March 23rd, 8 days before the deadline. If you are
> preparing a submission and are still tweaking the algorithm, then you
> are in trouble. If you want to push two submissions, then you are twice
> as much in trouble.

Right.  I am in trouble for still tweaking escrypt without having a
complete submission package.  I realize perfectly well that I am behind
schedule.  escrypt is just not ready for PHC yet given the full set of
requirements I currently have for it (are post-submission let's say
"major tweaks" OK?), and it might happen that escrypt won't be among the
submissions to PHC in the end if I am still not sufficiently happy with
it by the submission deadline (although I am going to try hard to
introduce the remaining planned features/properties in the last week),
or if there's simply not enough time left to submit it properly.  Either
way, the discussions in here have been extremely helpful, and I intend
to continue with escrypt regardless of whether it becomes a PHC
submission or not (although I realize that if not it might not receive
as much scrutiny, which would be very unfortunate).  I have specific
uses for escrypt that I think other PHC candidates discussed so far are
less appropriate for.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists