phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] Re: [SPAM] [PHC] Password hashing by itself is not enough

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: <CAOLP8p5+WA5emkFt3jfh_i0rW0TNdyjhGd6GCFS245ojw2zJfg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 08:10:54 -0700
From: Bill Cox <waywardgeek@...il.com>
To: "discussions@...sword-hashing.net" <discussions@...sword-hashing.net>
Subject: Re: [PHC] Re: [SPAM] [PHC] Password hashing by itself is not enough

On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 9:41 PM, Jeremy Spilman <jeremy@...link.co> wrote:

>  Another way I proposed is blind hashing / security by obesity. A very
> large common data pool can provide offline attack resistance for a large
> number of users at a very low cost per user. It's a very efficient way to
> defend the hashes. Google 'blind hashing', and I would love your feedback.
>

I Googled Blind Hashing, and the top result is a patent titled Blind
Hashing.  At Google, we're forbidden from reading patents, so I did not
even read the summary.  Is your idea patented, or was this just a random
unrelated patent?

Bill

Content of type "text/html" skipped