phc-discussions - OMG we have benchmarks

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2015 03:02:07 -0500 (CDT)
From: Steve Thomas <steve@...tu.com>
To: "discussions@...sword-hashing.net" <discussions@...sword-hashing.net>
Subject: OMG we have benchmarks

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mbroz/PHCtest/master/output/round2_Lenovo_X230_i5_16G/mc_cost_2/memory_time_round.png

Note I believe there might be a problem with some of it: battcrypt on 5x and
POMELO on 3x and 5x. Since those algorithms don't have t_costs for those and I
think they are run at lower settings.

But ignoring that these are the best benchmarks I've seen since they're
normalized for rounds across memory and time vs memory (instead of having t_cost
or m_cost as an axis).