2 ms·
"for a while" suggests that this was ever a recommended choice, which is not the case. As others have pointed out, for password hashing you want a specialized a
by zenhack 6y ago
"for a while" suggests that this was ever a recommended choice, which is not the case. As others have pointed out, for password hashing you want a specialized algorithm, not a general purpose cryptographic hash function. This is true regardless of whether the hash function is "compromised;" it just wasn't designed for that application in the first place.
Algorithms designed for password hashing are intentionally both compute and memory intensive, to make guessing slower, whereas general cryptographic hash functions are by contrast intended to be fast, as most applications will want that. The idea is that password hashing algorithms should be fast enough to keep up with a human and no faster; if you already know he password the performance is not a hindrance but if you have to guess it makes doing so impractical.
- easterncalculus 6y agoThat's a fair point, I didn't want to come off like it was ever a great choice. I definitely would argue that people are more aware now than they used to be, so thanks for clarifying that.