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: <553E445A.6060903@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 16:14:50 +0200 From: Milan Broz <gmazyland@...il.com> To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net Subject: Re: [PHC] Re: Updated tests document (version 2) On 04/23/2015 06:20 PM, Bill Cox wrote: > On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 1:41 AM, Milan Broz <gmazyland@...il.com > <mailto:gmazyland@...il.com>> wrote: > > I updated PHC candidates test with latest run > > https://github.com/mbroz/PHCtest/blob/master/output/phc_round2.pdf > > - many code updates announced here (including Argon, Catena, MAKWA, > etc) - added parallel test - I used newer machine for test (Lenovo > x240 i7 CPU) - Added pwxround=2 yescrypt to normalized test - > yescrypt now uses -opt version (not reference) (I did not add it to > other test these were meant to use defaults). - All tested passwords > are now randomly generated (/dev/urandom) (previously were hardcoded > in test program) > > > This is a great update, and I know how hard this is. Thanks for > doing it! > > Two things would improve it, IMO. First, improve contrast. Being > massively color blind, I cannot read half of the lines on your > charts. Make sure that 2 of 3 of the RGB values are no higher than > half (128), if you can, and if you can only do that with one color, > make it green or blue, not red. I tried to update linetypes, it should be better now for you, please check it. (Unfortunately I found only usable color palette for 8 series, so here it repeats colors just with different symbols - but is should be readable.) Also changed PPC test to use up to 160 processes. raw images here https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mbroz/PHCtest/master/output/round2_PPC64/r160_parallel_0/parallel_threads_160_0.png https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mbroz/PHCtest/master/output/round2_PPC64/r160_parallel_1/parallel_threads_160_1.png https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mbroz/PHCtest/master/output/round2_PPC64/r160_parallel_2/parallel_threads_160_2.png https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mbroz/PHCtest/master/output/round2_PPC64/r160_parallel_3/parallel_threads_160_3.png > The other thing is that we're still missing what I feel is the most > important charge for your use case: full disk encryption. There is > simply no reaon not to use the multi-core capability of the machine. > Most entries do not have a parallelism parameter, but it is an > absolutely critical feature for FDE. yes, but the whole testsuite is based on using PHC() function prototype. So either we should implement an another common interface for all candidates or I can run some targeted tests later (on finalists). (Authors should decide how to map the parallel attribute to internals. There can be parallelism on more levels etc - I do not want to make a decision how to map that parameter.) Thanks, Milan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists