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 18:05:38 +0200
From: Krisztián Pintér <pinterkr@...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 5:43 PM, Bill Cox <waywardgeek@...il.com> wrote:

> 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.

we've been through this, and you are wrong. cache timing attack might
reveal data that otherwise would not be accessible. it is not about
breaking the resource-requirement. to do cache timing or other timing,
you don't even need the password hash, you might infer the password
solely from timing information. that is a serious breach. i'm kind of
embarrassed that we need to discuss that in the 21st century. all new
designs are cache timing resistant (or ~ enabled), let it be keccak,
salsa, curve25519, etc. i'm very frustrated by this topic.