5 ms·

I wonder how this compares against bcrypt. I'm not a encryption expert, but reading the article got the impression that bcrypt is superior, at least is IMO is

• pkulak 6y ago
  Yeah, if you're trying to guard against brute force attacks, having a hash that takes one second to generate seems like it would be pretty effective. Maybe not against an attacker with nearly unlimited computing resources, but then again, what really can stand up to that? EDIT: No, I'm not really right about this, as explained here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25011716 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25011716
  • warkdarrior 6y ago
    The hash they chose takes one second on their host. bcrypt and scrypt provide better guarantees in terms of computation complexity.
• tubbyjr 6y ago
  Yeah, basically any modern KDF not being misused trumps this... I feel bad for the people that worked on this, since it definitely required a lot of effort, but I don't see any widespread adoption for it, since most engineers won't be able to keep up with it. I'll give it some proprs over the current mainstream stuff, which you have no idea how it works, at least there's some spec here.