phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] Another PHC candidates "mechanical" tests

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: <CALiR+uPfXschhvDcNjNuPOEvyoTqOqQNZgHF_K73FB10AnoGrA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 13:17:36 +0100
From: Sascha Schmidt <sascha.schmidt@...-weimar.de>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] Another PHC candidates "mechanical" tests

> But it is possible I did something wrong of course...
Well after all it looks like a simple misunderstanding. Catena isn't
supposed to be run with t_cost=lambda=0. In this case only
2*(garlic-min_garlic) calls to blake2b are made. This explains why
there is no difference between BRG and DBG and why your patched Catena
needs more memory.
Not catching this kind of mistake is clearly our fault and we already
uploaded a version with checks to our github repository.

Sincerely
Sascha Schmidt
Catena Code Monkey