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: <CALiR+uP=0JGcTiqWifCdzQBjGfRzkT2hes9uqBYNg5V7+g6AHA@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 14:02:53 +0200 From: Sascha Schmidt <sascha.schmidt@...-weimar.de> To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net Subject: Re: [PHC] Re: Updated tests document 2015-04-16 9:02 GMT+02:00 Milan Broz <gmazyland@...il.com>: > On 04/16/2015 08:53 AM, Milan Broz wrote: > Do we have table with minimal tcost/mcost parameters supported? > (Some reference papers mention them explicitly but not all.) Steve Thomas started one here: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.security.phc/2550 For Catena: t_cost in [1,255] m_cost in [1,63] A t_cost of 1 doesn't provide any additional memory hardness, but maybe suitable for some scenarios.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists