minitech

77 ms·

901.
by minitech 12y ago
> The salt (unknown to the attacker) The salt is generally known to the attacker. The point of the salt is that it’s unique for each password hash, making it impossible to run crack attempts on every password at the same time; for a pass
902.
by minitech 12y ago
> I'm afraid I don't follow. Your bit numbers confuse me They’re bits of entropy (not counting the password itself) (I think). SHA-512(M): 512 bits; SHA-512(SHA-256(M)): 256 bits, for example. > I don't see how this res
903.
by minitech 12y ago
Yes, I know. What point are you trying to make here? curiously asked: > is there anything that slack does you can't do with skype? So I named some things. Mostly being not P2P. I also prefer IRC over Slack, although you do need to h
904.
by minitech 12y ago
> That's a problem unrelated to hashing. It (poor implementation) is definitely related to implementing pepper on top of a secure password hash, though, which everybody is already doing differently. > I would avoid using any part
905.
by minitech 12y ago
> There's nothing wrong with nesting algorithms This is really vague. What kind of algorithm? With itself, or just anything inside anything else? Passing the raw output of any common cryptographic hash (SHA-x) to bcrypt, for example
906.
by minitech 12y ago
Skype is really bad for text chat. - It is closed-source, obfuscated, and untrustworthy overall ( https://www.eff.org/secure-messaging-scorecard ). - The supported (Windows and Mac) versions have obnoxious ads, and the Linux
907.
by minitech 12y ago
When you say “I notice millisecond differences”, that means “one millisecond”. If you meant something more on the order of hundreds of milliseconds, you should probably clarify that.
908.
by minitech 12y ago
For example…?
909.
by minitech 12y ago
I’m happy to say that I downvoted you specifically for that! It’s what I always do whenever there’s a rude remark, regardless of question content. Glad to see you’re getting so many votes now, though.