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  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]
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 20:15:48 +0000
From: Marsh Ray <>
To: "" <>
Subject: RE: [PHC] OMG we have benchmarks

-----Original Message-----
From: Solar Designer [] 
> In actual usage, those extra parameters may in fact be tuned to match specific use cases better.

Rijndael with a block size of 256 bits would fit many applications better than AES, too. But the world has generally agreed with NIST that having fewer choices makes a better standard than being perfectly flexible to fit all situations.

I feel tuning the PHC parameters for your hardware should be more like, say, buying a shirt and pants off the rack than getting a custom-tailored suit with half a dozen measurements.

- Marsh

Powered by blists - more mailing lists