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: <5608765C.5050500@openwall.com> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 02:06:04 +0300 From: Alexander Cherepanov <ch3root@...nwall.com> To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net Subject: Re: [PHC] Specification of a modular crypt format On 2015-09-14 23:43, Thomas Pornin wrote: >> I also think parameter values can be limited to non-negative integers at >> this time, unless you are aware of any password hashing schemes which >> would be incompatible with this. > > In Makwa, at least, it is preferable to have a binary identifier for the > used modulus (in the current spec, it is a hash of the modulus, > truncated to 8 bytes). This parameter does not map to a non-negative > integer (well, you _could_ make it an integer, since every sequence of > bits can be interpreted as an integer, but you see what I mean). > > Another case would be PBKDF2, which is configurable with an iteration > count, an output length, and an underlying PRF (usually HMAC with a > given hash function). The hash function name could be made part of the > function identifier (i.e. you have 'pbkdf2-sha1', not 'pbkdf2' with a > 'sha1' parameter), but, conceptually, you could make the hash function > one of the parameters (as a symbolic string). Then perhaps negative integers could be excluded? -- Alexander Cherepanov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists