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: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 18:36:44 +0200
From: Krisztián Pintér <>
Subject: Re: [PHC] gambit wiki strength

i wasn't aware that the wiki is open for editing. not that i want to
manage anyone's lives, but if i may have a suggestion:

i would not go awry with the editing. i think maintaining the
information there should be mostly the task of the panel and whoever
they ask. if someone edits, we need to conform to strict guidelines to
maintain unified style and phrasing.

here are some of my, uncalled for, woes, taken from catena page:

"Provably cache timing attack resistant"

i don't think that "provably" adds anything, it is obviously cache
timing resistant.

"Advanced framework features"

weasel phrase without actual meaning.

"which have strongly influenced other entries"

did it? which ones? anyway, it is not important.

"Advanced TMTO defense"

advanced is a weasel word


not sure i would use this term in this context, but also arguable and

just my 2c.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists