phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] Another PHC candidates "mechanical" tests (ROUND2)

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: <20150326185238.GA25257@openwall.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 21:52:38 +0300
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] Another PHC candidates "mechanical" tests (ROUND2)

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:59:25AM -0700, Bill Cox wrote:
> For generic servers that may be running multiple services at the same time
> as password hashing, it's probably best to choose a memory size
> significantly smaller than the L3 size.

I think this is not important (referring specifically to the effect on
other services).  Your worker is a synthetic benchmark focusing on L3
cache, whereas most real-world programs are different.  You may try that
"make -j4" vs. TwoCats test I mentioned.

Alexander