phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] PolyPassHash is broken

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]

Message-ID: <CAMVss_rQG9f-FboZAzhh4E0Y9OoBPeN-c3yMkaA_aXEf5y7dJQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2014 15:45:41 -0400
From: Justin Cappos <jcappos@....edu>
To: discussions <discussions@...sword-hashing.net>
Cc: polypasswordhasher-dev <polypasswordhasher-dev@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PHC] PolyPassHash is broken

We have some discussion about the points list in our paper (Sections 5.2.3
and 6 for example). However, I'll be more explicit and direct here.

Method 1
>  * get partial hash from DB
>  * find partial hash collision
>  * crash/restart server
>  * login
>

Sure you can do this.  Once a threshold is reached, the attack will be
detected because the full password hashes will not match.  That is, unless
the attacker is fortunate enough so that the partial hash collision is the
actual full hash / password.

Method 1.5 (for large partial hash [like ~48 bits])
>  * get partial hash from DB
>  * find partial hash collision
>  * try password
>  * repeat steps until password is found
>   - note you probably won't hit a password rate limit
>

I think there is some confusion in either what you propose or what I
understand you proposing.  If the system has bootstrapped, an incorrect
password will be detected and rejected because the full password will not
be matched.

If partial bytes matches but the rest does not, the administrator gets
notified.  (Or at least, this is what the Django implementation of PPH
does:
https://github.com/PolyPasswordHasher/PolyPasswordHasher-Django/wiki/Installing-PolyPasswordHasher-for-Django
)

Method 2
>  * crash/restart server
>  * quickly login several times
>  * repeat steps until partial hash collision is found
>

Yes, but if partial bytes is a reasonable value (let's say 32 bits) even if
you can make 100 requests per second, you would need an average of >8
months of "bootstrapping" time to get your first login.  So you'd not only
need to wait a very long time, but also be sure that a threshold of users
didn't log in then either...

> If there are no partial hashes in the DB, then this is equivalent to HMAC
> with
> secret key.

Where would the key come from in this case?

> Anyways this has a placeholder for a password hashing algo (ie the
> winner of PHC). So even if it didn't have these problems then it could
> only be
> mentioned in tandem with another entry.
>

Sure, this is something we've mentioned several times.  I also said before
that I don't think we fit with what other submissions are trying to do.
 We're orthogonal to them since we're a way to store password hashes
securely, more so than a better way to hash them.

We'd be happy to collaborate with the eventual winner, but don't expect to
be seriously considered because we don't fit the contest API, goals, etc.

Currently the hashing algorithm is "encrypt(SHA256(salt || password))"
>

As you mention, this is not inherent to the design.  This is a
implementation detail of the C version which was written specifically for
this contest.  Our Django version, which is being rolled out on a few
servers at NYU, may be better to poke holes in, if you are curious...

Justin

Content of type "text/html" skipped