phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] Can I have two entries?

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: <CAOLP8p7OdA9rKEBotHvHLX3R5yWiL6ig8d9xTdTR63qjE5jTRA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 22:12:33 -0400
From: Bill Cox <waywardgeek@...il.com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] Can I have two entries?

On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 7:19 PM, Jean-Philippe Aumasson
<jeanphilippe.aumasson@...il.com> wrote:
> Regarding SAMS (Single-Author Multiple-Submissions), I agree with
> Thomas' analysis.
>
> We will accept all submissions that match the requirements, so in
> theory one could submit 42 different functions. We'll just hate you
> for that ;-)
>
> On tweaks: submitters will be allowed to discuss/propose/announce
> tweaks whenever they want, however it is planned that tweaks will only
> be frozen and officially part of the submission after the finalists'
> selection (as noted on https://password-hashing.net/timeline.html).
>
> Fixes to bugs/typos/inconsistencies will of course be accepted
> anytime. But I don't expect those to be major reworks of the
> submission. In this kind of competition, too many design iterations
> tends to be counterproductive.

Thomas' explanation cleared it up for me.  His comments about the AES
and SHA3 competitions where very interesting.  I'm still struggling
with fixing the latest problem Solar Designer pointed out (less than
optimal multiplication compute time hardening), but I think I'll be
ready on time with TwoCats.  I'm going to take yet another of Solar
Designer's suggestions and try to find time to implement a SkinnyCat
or TwoCatsLite as part of that submission, which would be a compatible
mode where some parameters are set to values that disable their
function (such as repetitions and multiplications).  It might even
help the cryptanalysts, because if they can find a weakness in
SkinnyCat, there's no need to bother with the bulkier TwoCats, and if
it's found secure enough, they'll have a good basis for analysing the
full algorithm.  With this little time left, though, the SkinnyCat
subset will be a bit crufty.

Regardless, it's all been outstanding fun.

Bill