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: <20150419014559.GA4765@openwall.com> Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2015 04:45:59 +0300 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net Subject: Re: [PHC] "Attack on the iterative compression function" Dmitry, On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 10:55:31AM +0200, Dmitry Khovratovich wrote: > In order to get the numbers for other values of t, you just change the > constant 1.33 in main() to the number of passes. This worked fine for the change to 4.0/3.0, but when I put 5.0/3.0, I get an extra line of output: Average Penalty for fraction 1 (100 close values): 1.33 Latency: 1.33 Read: 1.33 Since this line shows penalties of 1.33 rather than 1.00, I am concerned that other reported penalties might be off as well. Perhaps something else needs to be changed? Can you explain the WIDTH_TEST / (3 * q) on this line? - tradeoffs.push_back(TradeoffFunc(q, WIDTH_TEST / (3 * q),passes)); It corresponds to "unsigned top_size", and I don't see why e.g. for q=2 it should be WIDTH_TEST/6. Thanks, Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists