phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] PHC output specifics

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: <20150306183135.GA23706@bolet.org>
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 19:31:35 +0100
From: Thomas Pornin <pornin@...et.org>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] PHC output specifics

On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 05:03:42PM +1300, Peter Gutmann wrote:
> In terms of standardisation, there's not much there that's design-specific

I may point out that in the case of Makwa, the API necessarily has some
specificities, namely that it uses as parameter a big composite modulus,
and that the delegation feature (if you use it) must, by definition, use
a process that the API shall support.

(Makwa is a bit of a joker, at this stage of PHC. It has no memory cost,
only CPU, but it has parameters and functionalities that have no
equivalent in any other of the candidates.)

On the other hand, I have already defined (and implemented, and
documented) APIs for Makwa.

	--Thomas Pornin