3 ms·
Only assuming the attacker doesn't get the "pepper". Since the password hashes should be kept securely, if you've got a way to keep the attacker from getting to
by SAI_Peregrinus 6y ago
Only assuming the attacker doesn't get the "pepper". Since the password hashes should be kept securely, if you've got a way to keep the attacker from getting to the pepper you should just store the hashes there instead.
It can be useful as a "defense in depth" thing, but it's not a particularly meaningful improvement to practical security.
- colmmacc 6y agoIn general, the benefit of encryption is 1/ defense in depth by requiring an additional secret and 2/ the reduced size of that secret you have to protect. E.g. you can protect a 2GB top secret data trove with a 128-bit AES key. The same applies here, and it can be cheaper/easier/more-effective to lock an encryption key away in an enclave than the whole thing.
- SAI_Peregrinus 6y agoExcept that they're talking about per-user pepper, so 16 bytes per user, in addition to the hash & salt. It's not a sensible tradeoff.