From: Phillip Susi <psusi@cfl.rr.com>
To: Phillip Hellewell <phillip@hellewell.homeip.net>
Cc: Michael Halcrow <lkml@halcrow.us>,
Michael Halcrow <mhalcrow@us.ibm.com>,
akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, viro@ftp.linux.org.uk,
mcthomps@us.ibm.com, yoder1@us.ibm.com, toml@us.ibm.com,
emilyr@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: eCryptfs Design Document
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 21:53:05 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <44275391.40501@cfl.rr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060327000522.GA11655@hellewell.homeip.net>
Phillip Hellewell wrote:
> Again I concur with Mike. Iterative hashing is a very common technique,
> and is very effective against this type of dictionary attack. If you
> hash 1000 times, then an attack that normally could check 1 million
> passwords per second would now only be able to check 1000 passwords per
> second.
>
> Without iterative hashing, as computers get faster, so would dictionary
> attacks, and then people would have to keep using longer and longer
> passwords to be as effective. Iterative hashing "levels the playing
> field" in a way.
>
Except that I believe you can write code to compute the nth hash in O(1)
time rather than O(n) time, so that kind of defeats the purpose, though
I'm no expert so I could be wrong.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-27 2:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-24 22:25 eCryptfs Design Document Michael Halcrow
2006-03-24 23:12 ` James Morris
2006-03-27 16:17 ` Michael Thompson
2006-03-27 16:52 ` Michael Halcrow
2006-03-24 23:49 ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-25 0:13 ` Michael Halcrow
2006-03-25 0:33 ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-25 7:38 ` Miklos Szeredi
2006-03-27 23:31 ` Michael Halcrow
2006-03-28 16:00 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2006-03-29 20:14 ` Michael Halcrow
2006-03-25 19:28 ` Phillip Susi
2006-03-25 19:50 ` Michael Halcrow
2006-03-26 17:10 ` Phillip Susi
2006-03-26 18:04 ` Michael Halcrow
2006-03-27 0:05 ` Phillip Hellewell
2006-03-27 2:53 ` Phillip Susi [this message]
2006-03-27 16:10 ` Michael Thompson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=44275391.40501@cfl.rr.com \
--to=psusi@cfl.rr.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=emilyr@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkml@halcrow.us \
--cc=mcthomps@us.ibm.com \
--cc=mhalcrow@us.ibm.com \
--cc=phillip@hellewell.homeip.net \
--cc=toml@us.ibm.com \
--cc=viro@ftp.linux.org.uk \
--cc=yoder1@us.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).