3 ms·
I don't see the point actually. If one figures out the password from the hash its going to work on all servers anyway...
by asdfaoeu 11y ago
I don't see the point actually. If one figures out the password from the hash its going to work on all servers anyway...
- seletskiy 11y agoNope. Attacker can figure out "some" password (e.g. will find collision for specific salt+hash), that will be valid only for the server it already has access too, so it's not the big deal. All other nodes will have different salt+hash pairs, so brute-forced password will be not valid for them.
- akerl_ 11y agoI must be missing something, then: if you take input password A and salt/hash it individually for each server, and the attacker finds the valid input password A via brute force on one, why wouldn't it work on all of them? They aren't brute-forcing to find the salt or the hash, they're brute forcing input password A.
- asdfaoeu 11y agoThe attacker isn't going to find a collision that is not your password unless you are using a stupidly weak hash algorithm. The only input the attacker is likely to find is the original password and this is assuming it has less than 128bits of entropy.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- MichaelGG 11y agoThat'd only apply if they're using very long, random passwords. For a 128-bit hash that'd be at least ~20 chars using the entire keyboard, and over 22 if alphanumeric only. Your docs mention SHA256/512, so double or quad those. If your attacker is able to "figure out" 128-bit+ passwords, then you've probably got other problems. And if the point of using passwords is for emergency logins from phones, I'm not sure how useful a 80 char pass is. Might as well keep the ssh key saved somewhere and type it in eh?
- huipizda 11y agoI guess attacker can find a collision to hash (using bruteforce), not real password (because real password should be very strong)
- STRML 11y agoAs asdfaoeu noted above, the chances of this actually happening are very close to zero for any password anyone would realistically use.