3 ms·
Hashing as a service seems like a bad idea. I like the core concept though. The patent description seems pretty vague [0]. Do you think I can whip up my own pro
by deckar01 9y ago
Hashing as a service seems like a bad idea. I like the core concept though. The patent description seems pretty vague [0]. Do you think I can whip up my own project (maybe called FatHash) that does this without your remote server and without infringing on your patent?
[0]: https://www.google.com/patents/US9225729 https://www.google.com/patents/US9225729
- zaroth 9y agoThat’s not the right patent - that’s something else entirely! Goes to show how poorly written most patents are. Hopefully you’ll find this one more informative: https://www.google.com/patents/US9021269 https://www.google.com/patents/US9021269 Part of the reason I’ve been able to raise money and spend several years of my life trying to build and evangelize this new/better way of protecting passwords is because the USPTO has granted us the exclusive right to license it in the US through ~2033.
- deckar01 9y agoThat is a much better patent. Sorry for the confusion. The "index into a random data block" is already a primitive cryptographic operation in key expansion and hashing algorithms, but the block is deterministically generated pseudo randomly from a seed. It would be interesting to replace the seeding operation with an offset into a large static pool generated from a source of true randomness.