4 ms·
> scrypt is asymptotically much more expensive to crack. How so? The cost of password cracking generally scales completely linearly, is there an attack on bcry
by tveita 11y ago
> scrypt is asymptotically much more expensive to crack.
How so? The cost of password cracking generally scales completely linearly, is there an attack on bcrypt that makes the cost sublinear? I would agree that scrypt probably has a better constant factor on typical hardware.
- mckiddy 11y agoscrypt is deliberately designed to use a large amount of memory when calculating hashes, which makes it much more difficult to parallelize using a GPU (which don't have much RAM available), hence making it much much slower to attack.
- tveita 11y agoscrypt cracking is still embarrassingly parallel even if it's hard to run on a GPU. I understand the term "asymptotically more" to refer to big O notation, where constant factors like that are ignored.
- Dylan16807 11y agoWell it's hard to state what exact n is here, but you'd probably be increasing both the calculation time and memory requirements at 2^n, so you need roughly 1/k of an entire computer to calculate even as Moore's law marches on and factors increase, but PBKDF2 parallelizes more and more.