From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jan 28 19:39:34 2010
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86BE1106566C
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 28 Jan 2010 19:39:34 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from chris@noncombatant.org)
Received: from strawberry.noncombatant.org (strawberry.noncombatant.org
	[64.142.6.126]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BEFC8FC18
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 28 Jan 2010 19:39:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by strawberry.noncombatant.org (Postfix, from userid 1002)
	id AC88431E2C66; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 11:39:41 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 11:39:41 -0800
From: Chris Palmer <chris@noncombatant.org>
To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org, Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
Message-ID: <20100128193941.GK892@noncombatant.org>
References: <20100128182413.GI892@noncombatant.org>
	<20100128135410.7b6fe154.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20100128135410.7b6fe154.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Cc: 
Subject: Re: PHK's MD5 might not be slow enough anymore
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
	<freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 19:39:34 -0000

Bill Moran writes:

> I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but you can't do this
> without establishing this as an entirely new algorithm.  The hashes
> generated after your patch will not be compatible with existing password
> files, thus anyone who applies this will be unable to log in.  Have you
> tried it?

Yes, which is why I reset my passwords after doing "make install", which
worked fine. I suppose I should have mentioned that in the first message. :)

People installing the OS fresh won't need to take this step.

Note that 1,000 is simply too low -- the security value of PHK's scheme is
lost as computers increase in speed. Therefore, taking a minute to update my
passwords is acceptable to me. Since there is 0 cost for people installing
fresh, there is no reason not to do it.

The blowfish algorithm should also be similarly tuned.