[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50FA6503.1060508@uni-weimar.de>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 10:18:59 +0100
From: Christian Forler <christian.forler@...-weimar.de>
To: crypt-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Password Scrambling
Am 19.01.2013 09:39, schrieb Colin Percival:
>> Of course, I'm familiar with scrypt. You did a great job. Your idea of
>> using a memory-hard algorithm was beautiful.
>
> Note that it needs to be *sequential* memory-hard, not just memory-hard -- it's
> easy to construct functions which need a lot of RAM to compute, but much harder
> to construct functions which require a lot of RAM *and* cannot be sped up by
> using O(N) CPU. In hardware, of course, extra CPUs are "free".
In the password recovery scenario, an adversary A tries to compute as
many password candidates as possible in a given time t.
Let's say A has access to multiple CPUs. Then there are two extreme cases:
1) A can test one candidate per CPU in parallel or
2) A can parallelize the KDF function and test the candidates in a
sequential order.
In both cases, I would assume that the number of computed password
candidates is similar apart a constant factor c. Or is this not the case?
Best regards,
Christian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
