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: <20150307121817.GA14881@openwall.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:18:17 +0300
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] PHC output specifics

On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 02:53:34PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Aumasson wrote:
> Should the "standardization phase" be public

Yes, please.  But panel members should have a final say.

> (thus after selection and announcing winners)

Not necessarily.  We may as well discuss standardization-related
proposals for finalists before we've selected winners, and our ability
to come up with good ways to standardize a finalist might affect its
selection as a winner.

> or not (thus by panel members only, after
> selecting but before announcing winners)?

I think we should avoid/minimize whatever delays there might be between
making and announcing any decision.  So I dislike this option.

> Should it be public, a risk is that it degenerates into CFRG-like
> bikeshedding...

It should be the panel's responsibility to make decisions in a timely
manner, regardless of whatever bikeshedding there might be on this
mailing list.

Alexander