4 ms·
https://github.com/esurharun/kyle/blob/master/lib/kyle.rb#L112 https://github.com/esurharun/kyle/blob/master/lib/kyle.rb#L1... ret += Constants::PASSWORD_CHA
by minitech 10y ago
https://github.com/esurharun/kyle/blob/master/lib/kyle.rb#L112 https://github.com/esurharun/kyle/blob/master/lib/kyle.rb#L1...
ret += Constants::PASSWORD_CHARS[c % Constants::PASSWORD_CHARS.length]
Looks like biased output.
Also, what is this? (From https://github.com/sceptive/Forgiva https://github.com/sceptive/Forgiva)
algorithm forgiva-iterative-hashing
Input: Value to hashed as DATA, Algorithm array AARRAY
Ouput: Hashed input data
final_value = DATA
for each character C in DATA
algorithm = AARRAY index of (C code num modulus AARRAY)
final_value = forgiva-hash(final_value, algorithm)
return final_value
Is that selection of algorithms based on the hash? Doesn’t seem to jive with
> It's developed by security professionals
- marcusfrex 10y agoIt generates underterministic way of calculation for a time-span of a successfull brute-force attack. Various hashing and encryption algorithms runs in different performance values. Thus, estimating for a CPU/GPU power or time range to attack Forgiva is more harder than other systems. Every master-key generates a different time and processor cost as you see. So this makes estimations fail for all attacking sessions.
- minitech 10y ago> Every master-key generates a different time and processor cost as you see. This is generally a bad thing and sounds like it will open you up to some kind of timing attack in the future. > It generates underterministic way of calculation for a time-span of a successfull brute-force attack. This doesn’t improve security and just adds unnecessary complexity.