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: <CA+hr98HR+EW29XgNSOomX6jy2cAL5P1V9Rqc4SJJ==_w4tySjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 13:24:47 +0200
From: Krisztián Pintér <pinterkr@...il.com>
To: "discussions@...sword-hashing.net" <discussions@...sword-hashing.net>
Subject: Re: [PHC] Another PHC candidates "mechanical" tests (ROUND2)

On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 5:11 AM, Hongjun Wu <wuhongjun@...il.com> wrote:
> Eventually it turns out that a number of second round candidates need to cut
> the round number significantly.   I feel that it is no longer true that
> those PHC candidates are based on strong crypto primitives, although they
> are still very strong.

it depends on the primitive. for example reduced round keccak is shown
to be safe in certain modes, and i would claim that password hashing
is such a mode. namely authors explored the use of reduced round
keccak-f in keyed modes, in which an attacker is not in control of the
input. the conclusion was that round numbers down to 3 from 24 are
still considered safe.

http://keccak.noekeon.org/KeccakDIAC2012.pdf
4.1 The donkeySponge construction

i assume we can say in general that primitives designed to deal with
malicious input are overly strong for password hashing, and in some
cases, it can actually be shown.