2 ms·
This blog post was instrumental in convincing large swaths of programmers 10 years ago why normal hashing doesn't cut it. This was in a time that PHP code snipp
by skrebbel 6y ago
This blog post was instrumental in convincing large swaths of programmers 10 years ago why normal hashing doesn't cut it. This was in a time that PHP code snippets doing md5($password) were widespread. If people were even hashing passwords at all. It was a time when lots of crypto was hard to use for programmers, and the jargon gap between cryptographers and programmers was even bigger than it was now. A blog post that unambiguously told people what to was uncommon and much needed.
This post truly is internet history. Complaining that there's alternatives today that solve the same problem better than bcrypt is beside the point. The fundamental insight hasn't changed, only the best available algorithm.
- tptacek 6y agoStrong agree, noting also that bcrypt still holds up well. Articles like these set off a bit of a research fad in designing password hashes, which is great, but also created the impression that using the wrong password hash is like using SHA1 or 1024 bit RSA, which is not the case. By all means, use Argon2 if you like; it is "better", but not decisively so. Or just put PBKDF2, scrypt, bcrypt, and Argon2 on a wall and throw a dart. The danger is in not using a password hash at all, but rather using a "salted hash".