phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] gambit wiki strength

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]

Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 13:08:15 -0500 (CDT)
From: Steve Thomas <steve@...tu.com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] gambit wiki strength

> On April 14, 2014 at 11:36 AM Krisztián Pintér <pinterkr@...il.com> wrote:
>
> 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:

Me either :).

> 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.

I don't think people that submitted algorithms should be able to edit other
algorithms' wiki pages. Even though I submitted and I'm editing other
algorithms' wiki pages, but I feel like it's my duty to help anywhere I can
with PHC because I'm on the panel. I really just started writing pseudocode
so I could get an in depth look at the algorithms and simple reminders of
how they work. I thought it was useful so I started posting them. I also
tried to be as unbiased as I can and put warnings on them: "strengths are
not written by designers. Blame Steve for this being wrong or incomplete."

Side note I trust other panel members that have also submitted with editing
mine because if this becomes a problem they might be kicked off the panel.
As would I if I did the same.

> 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
>
> "KISS"
>
> not sure i would use this term in this context, but also arguable and
> imprecise.
>
> just my 2c.

I noticed that too but TwoCats takes the cake:
"Named after two cats http://waywardgeek.net/twocats.png"