phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] What Microsoft Would like from the PHC

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: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 11:43:10 -0400
From: Bill Cox <waywardgeek@...il.com>
To: "discussions@...sword-hashing.net" <discussions@...sword-hashing.net>
Subject: Re: [PHC] What Microsoft Would like from the PHC - Passwords14 presentation

On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 3:45 AM, Krisztián Pintér <pinterkr@...il.com>
wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 12:58 AM, Bill Cox <waywardgeek@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > It obviously has the same cache timing resistance characteristics as the
> other hybrid designs, which are labelled with "maybe" rather than "no".
>
>
> there is no such thing as sorta cache timing resistant. it either is
> or isn't. if it isn't, we can talk about how hard to exploit.
>

OK, then all the hybrid designs are *not* cache timing resistant.  However,
they all happen to be better at *defending the password* than any of the
cache-timing resistant algorithms, even when the attacker has cache-timing
data.  What should we call algorithms that provide better cache-timing
password defense than cache-timing resistant algorithms?

Bill

Content of type "text/html" skipped