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  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, 12 Dec 2014 03:12:48 -0800
From: epixoip <epixoip@...dshell.nl>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] How important is salting really?

On 12/12/2014 2:48 AM, Stefan.Lucks@...-weimar.de wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2014, Ben Harris wrote:
>
>> On 12 December 2014 at 17:53, epixoip <epixoip@...dshell.nl> wrote:
>>       Thus the salt table shrinks with each successful
>>       crack, and the effective speed of the attack increases with each
>>       eliminated salt.
>>
>>
>> A rather confusing way to describe things. If we are attacking all
>> password
>> hashes, one password at a time (from the most common down). Then each
>> time we
>> find a match, the pool of hashes decreases and subsequent passwords
>> can be
>> search faster.
>
> Ah, now I see what epixoip means. I don't think, this comes even close
> to a justification for *not* using salts.

I didn't say it was a justification not to use salts. I said the
opposite. I said salts were necessary, but insufficient on their own. In
other words, an algorithm must not rely on solely upon salting. In other
other words, something like sha256(s.p) is insufficient.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists