3 ms·
It is possible. But much easier to get wrong than to get right. Specifically if you hash the password client side then the hash fundamentally becomes the passw
by Someone1234 7y ago
It is possible. But much easier to get wrong than to get right.
Specifically if you hash the password client side then the hash fundamentally becomes the password, and having that sit plaintext in logs is identical to the pre-hash password since both can re-played to authenticate.
I believe this is still a respected/secure version of what you describe:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Remote_Password_protocol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Remote_Password_protoco...
- gpm 7y agoNo, having a client side hashed password sit in your logs is way better because it only introduces risk for your own service, instead of risk for every user who reuses their password on multiple services. It changes a compromise log from a widespread identify theft risk to a contained privilege escalation risk. (Provided either you, or all the other services using this scheme, are sensible enough to salt with a string unique to their website such as a domain name)
- Hello71 7y agojust "hashing the password" is not a "challenge-response" protocol.
- cyc115 7y agoThank you