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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73AAFEFC83@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz> Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 10:31:08 +0000 From: Peter Gutmann <pgut001@...auckland.ac.nz> To: "discussions@...sword-hashing.net" <discussions@...sword-hashing.net> Subject: RE: [PHC] Competition process Dmitry Khovratovich <khovratovich@...il.com> writes: >2) The submissions evolve over the competition period significantly, >absorbing new ideas and constructions from the discussion, possibly even >merging with each other. The confidence in the winner(s) comes from the >consensus in the committee on certain features that are gradually integrated >in the final version. That's the approach I prefer (see my earlier thoughts about allowing a final round of updates for the top three, before a single best-of-breed is chosen). Argon2 is such an obvious improvement, it seems odd to keep it out so that the decision has to be made on a previous-generation version. Or, more worryingly, that the decision on Argon might be made on the assumption that what'll be adopted is actually Argon2, blurring the line over what's being decided on. (Apologies to Jean-Philippe, who started off with a competition and is now running a soccer match :-). Peter.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists