phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] Can we add back Argon2id?

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CA+hr98H4kC=L30vqHqw5xQ5+OQLZ0GFMYcUoSmB4fu8ZgpL3qg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 10:21:39 +0200
From: Krisztián Pintér <pinterkr@...il.com>
To: "discussions@...sword-hashing.net" <discussions@...sword-hashing.net>
Subject: Re: [PHC] Can we add back Argon2id?

On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 10:32 PM, Bill Cox <waywardgeek@...il.com> wrote:
> Can we add back Argon2id?

one vote against. if the attack model includes side channels, 2i is
the way to go. if it does not, 2d. 2id would be useful if the attack
model sorta included side channels, but sorta didn't. or we don't
care, but want to check the box. i don't see the realism in this
scenario.