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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 00:15:46 +0300
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: Meltem Sonmez Turan <meltemsturan@...il.com>
Cc: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: NIST standardization

Hi Meltem,

I asked you these questions on the panel list, and as I mentioned I'd
like to re-ask them on the public discussions list now:

Is NIST any more likely to standardize an eventual PHC winner that is
based on a NIST-standardized primitive such as SHA-2 than on e.g. BLAKE2?

Similarly, is NIST any more likely to standardize an eventual PHC winner
that is based on an established primitive such as BLAKE2 than on custom
crypto such as what we see in POMELO?

Finally, is it a valid argument for NIST that with proper entropy
bypasses from {password, salt} to PHS() output via an established crypto
primitive, the bulk of the processing may be considered non-crypto and
thus any custom non-crypto like this (e.g., yescrypt's pwxform) isn't a
barrier to standardization?

Thanks,

Alexander

Powered by blists - more mailing lists