On May 31, 2012, at 3:03 PM, Marsh Ray wrote:

> On 05/31/2012 11:28 AM, Nico Williams wrote:
>> 
>> Yes, but note that one could address that with some assumptions, and
>> with some techniques that one would reject when making a better hash
>> -- the point is to be slow,
> 
> More precisely, the point is to take a tunable amount of time with strong 
> assurance that an attacker will be unable to perform the computation with 
> significantly less computational resources.
> 
> The deliberate consumption of computational resources is a price that the 
> defender has to pay in order to impose costs on the attacker. This ought to 
> be an advantageous strategy for the defender as long as the attacker is 
> expected to need to invoke the function many times more.
> 
> But the defender's and attacker's cost structure is usually very different. 
> The defender (say a website with a farm of PHP servers) doesn't get to choose 
> when to begin the computation (legitimate users can log in at any time) and 
> he pays a cost for noticeable latency and server resources.
> 
> The attacker costs are proportional to the number of guesses he needs to make 
> to reverse the password. Hopefully this is dominated by wrong guesses. But 
> the attacker is free to parallelize the computation across whatever 
> specialized hardware he can assemble in the time that the credentials are 
> valid (sometimes years). Some attackers could be using stolen resources (e.g. 
> botnets for which they do not pay the power bill).


There's another, completely different issue: does the attacker want a 
particular password, or will any passwords from a large set suffice?  

Given the availability of cheap cloud computing, botnets, GPUs, and botnets 
with GPUs, Aa * Ah * Ap can be very, very high, i.e., the attacker has a strong 
advantage when attacking a particular password.  Some say that it's so high 
that increasing Ad is essentially meaningless.  On the other hand, if there are 
many passwords in the set being attacked, a large Ad translates into a 
reduction in the fraction that can be attack in any given time frame.

                --Steve Bellovin, https://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb





_______________________________________________
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography

Reply via email to