From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/1797 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Szabolcs Nagy Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Help-wanted tasks for musl Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 10:40:01 +0200 Message-ID: <20120830084001.GL1104@port70.net> References: <20120820005128.GB27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120820013502.GG16602@port70.net> <20120820013950.GC27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120820015854.GH16602@port70.net> <20120820021223.GE27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120828200942.GF1104@port70.net> <20120828233506.GG1104@port70.net> <20120829143012.GT27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120829151459.GJ1104@port70.net> <20120829170132.GY27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1346316016 27638 80.91.229.3 (30 Aug 2012 08:40:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 08:40:16 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-1798-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Thu Aug 30 10:40:18 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1T70IS-0000bn-T4 for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 10:40:17 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 28139 invoked by uid 550); 30 Aug 2012 08:40:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 28131 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2012 08:40:13 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120829170132.GY27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:1797 Archived-At: * Rich Felker [2012-08-29 13:01:32 -0400]: > Committed. I also put strict rounds count checks in place for the > existing hashes. Previously the only limit was on blowfish where the > limit kept the runtime down to minutes instead of months/years, but > that was of little practical benefit. Anyone who thinks the limits are > too low/too high/whatever is welcome to bikeshed this... > i think the current setting is too low :) i'd use the same setting for both (sha512 can be significantly faster on 64bit than on 32bit) the limit need not be more than 1M but should be at least 100k (one can easily wait these out on a fast machine) a quick search on the web found several cases where sha crypt is promoted with high rounds: $6$rounds=65536 https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/SHA_password_hashes $5$rounds=73500 http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/15083/is-there-repetition-in-the-solaris-11-hash-routine-can-i-add-some $5$rounds=80000 (this is the default in passlib!) http://packages.python.org/passlib/lib/passlib.context-tutorial.html $6$rounds=100000 http://lwn.net/Articles/489234 $6$rounds=1000000 (!!) http://twerner.blogspot.hu/2010/01/improving-password-security-in-debian.html bug: somehow i forgot to add 'static' to sha256 hash functions (sha256_init, sha256_update, sha256_sum) so they are visible