From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 10 20:13:51 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93E291065673 for ; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 20:13:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from piechota@argolis.org) Received: from vms173013pub.verizon.net (vms173013pub.verizon.net [206.46.173.13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 726AB8FC26 for ; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 20:13:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.4] ([unknown] [98.114.37.117]) by vms173013.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 32bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPA id <0M5F00MSS1ED0J82@vms173013.mailsrvcs.net> for freebsd-security@freebsd.org; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 14:13:25 -0500 (CDT) Message-id: <4FD4F1D5.9090900@argolis.org> Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 15:13:25 -0400 From: Matt Piechota User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-version: 1.0 To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org References: <86r4tqotjo.fsf@ds4.des.no> <6E26E03B-8D1D-44D3-B94E-0552BE5CA894@FreeBSD.org> In-reply-to: <6E26E03B-8D1D-44D3-B94E-0552BE5CA894@FreeBSD.org> Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Default password hash X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 20:13:51 -0000 On 06/10/2012 06:02 AM, Simon L. B. Nielsen wrote: > Has anyone looked at how long the SHA512 password hashing actually > takes on modern computers? The "real" solution for people who care > significantly about this seems something like the algorithm pjd > implemented (I think he did it at least) for GELI, where the number of > rounds is variable and calculated so it takes X/0.X seconds on the > specific hardware used. That's of course a lot more complicated, and > I'm not sure if it would work with the crypt() API. I'm kinda curious about this: I take it you'd encode the number of rounds in the string somehow? Otherwise, the hash wouldn't be portable to another machine (or even if you upgrade the current machine). -- Matt Piechota