Re: BCrypt and PBKDF2 Password Hash Caching

2013-11-27 Thread Luke Plant
On 15/11/13 18:42, Erik van Zijst wrote: > How do people feel about this approach and should it be merged into > Django? If not, then I can turn it into a library instead. Maybe at our > size we're not in Django's sweet spot anymore. However, in their current > version the recommended hashers are

Re: BCrypt and PBKDF2 Password Hash Caching

2013-11-19 Thread Erik van Zijst
On Tuesday, 19 November 2013 18:38:33 UTC-8, Wim Lewis wrote: > > > On 19 Nov 2013, at 6:10 PM, Javier Guerra Giraldez wrote: > > but still you get only SHA1-level strength, when the whole idea was to > > switch to stronger crypto. if in your case SHA1 is enough, you can > > simply keep using

Re: BCrypt and PBKDF2 Password Hash Caching

2013-11-19 Thread Wim Lewis
On 19 Nov 2013, at 6:10 PM, Javier Guerra Giraldez wrote: > but still you get only SHA1-level strength, when the whole idea was to > switch to stronger crypto. if in your case SHA1 is enough, you can > simply keep using it. if it's not enough, then you shouldn't be using > it. Well, it seems

Re: BCrypt and PBKDF2 Password Hash Caching

2013-11-19 Thread Donald Stufft
Password hashing schemes are slow on purpose to prevent brute force. Siphash wouldn't make sense because if you're switching for speed you can just use any secure hash function. crypt by default is much slower than PBKDF2 FWIW. You should tune the work factor/iterations until it's fast enough

Re: BCrypt and PBKDF2 Password Hash Caching

2013-11-19 Thread Javier Guerra Giraldez
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 8:48 PM, Erik van Zijst wrote: > You make a good point. > > An obvious fix would seem to be to add the username to the cache key. This > way users cannot "use" another user's cache entry. right, that would fix it. (i guess, i'm no security

Re: BCrypt and PBKDF2 Password Hash Caching

2013-11-19 Thread Erik van Zijst
You make a good point. An obvious fix would seem to be to add the username to the cache key. This way users cannot "use" another user's cache entry. Cheers, Erik On Friday, 15 November 2013 11:41:43 UTC-8, Javier Guerra wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Marc Tamlyn >

Re: BCrypt and PBKDF2 Password Hash Caching

2013-11-15 Thread Javier Guerra Giraldez
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Marc Tamlyn wrote: > That said, sounds an interesting solution and would make a good library. > However I'm not knowledgeable enough to say if it is a good idea from a > security perspective. imagine this scenario: an attacker gets the

Re: BCrypt and PBKDF2 Password Hash Caching

2013-11-15 Thread Marc Tamlyn
I would suggest that's the kind of thing which is unlikely to get merged, mainly for security reasons as someone could potentially configure it more wrong than other things. It's also only useful or relevant for nonstandard large deployments such as yourselves. That said, sounds an interesting

BCrypt and PBKDF2 Password Hash Caching

2013-11-15 Thread Erik van Zijst
We run bitbucket.org and are upgrading from SHA1 to BCrypt hashes. We offer Basic Auth support which is used a lot. So much so that we can't handle the increased load from these more expensive hashes. This has been the cause behind a recent self-inflicted DOS. BCrypt and PBKDF2 are ~4-5 orders