3 ms·
I brought it up mostly because I was hoping someone would point out how typing can easily fix such timing attacks, but yeah that was a legitimate issue. [1] sho
by AlotOfReading 5y ago
I brought it up mostly because I was hoping someone would point out how typing can easily fix such timing attacks, but yeah that was a legitimate issue. [1] shows a walkthrough of one attack.
In the particular case of password verification, I don't think it'd be that bad. It simply gives attackers more information than they should have. The issues are obvious if the hash doesn't have perfect diffusion. It also allows you to begin reconstructing the hash and performing offline attacks e.g. to avoid (already too-lax) rate limits.
https://medium.com/@TamasPolgar/can-timing-attack-be-a-practical-security-threat-on-jwt-signature-ba3c8340dea9 https://medium.com/@TamasPolgar/can-timing-attack-be-a-pract...
- vitus 5y agoOne thing that bothered me from an initial skim of that medium post: > Even if the difference is only 0.0011 nanoseconds, the test is reproducible and each gives similar results. From the graphs, this should read 0.0011 _milliseconds_. 0.0011 ns is eons faster than any CPU clocks out there (roughly 900 GHz), and would take a heck of a lot more samples :) Meanwhile, 0.0011 ms is on the order of a microsecond, which is very doable. (other than that, everything else checks out.)