Bitcoin Forum
May 09, 2024, 09:41:01 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Why not use Bcrypt?  (Read 1815 times)
nahtnam (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092
Merit: 1000


nahtnam.com


View Profile WWW
February 24, 2015, 11:33:01 PM
 #1

Looking at this: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bHlm4NQkSzaBTT5tLIqQBmV92wSsbdOX5r-dRR9Dgg0/edit

I dont think its mentioned, but I think bcrypt should be used for passwords since its probably one of the most secure hashing algorithms.

1715290861
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715290861

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715290861
Reply with quote  #2

1715290861
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1715290861
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715290861

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715290861
Reply with quote  #2

1715290861
Report to moderator
Madness
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 500


My goal is becaming a billionaire.


View Profile WWW
February 25, 2015, 06:40:53 AM
 #2

Pretty good idea , what what's the forum is using right now? MD5 or something if yes then it would be good to use bcrypt because brute-forcing the password will be 10 times more expensive with bcrypt than with MD5.

~ Madness

Muhammed Zakir
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560
Merit: 506


I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!


View Profile WWW
February 25, 2015, 08:23:38 AM
Last edit: February 25, 2015, 08:46:22 AM by Muhammed Zakir
 #3

+1 from me. I was looking for disadvantages of using Bcrypt and one disadvantage I found is that the output length is not configurable. From http://www.tarsnap.com/scrypt/scrypt.pdf:



   -MZ

Blazr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 882
Merit: 1005



View Profile
February 25, 2015, 08:43:50 AM
 #4

The forum already uses its own hashing method, IIRC its 10,000 rounds of RIPEMD160 with a unique salt per user. This is as safe as it gets.

Muhammed Zakir
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560
Merit: 506


I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!


View Profile WWW
February 25, 2015, 09:08:42 AM
 #5

The forum already uses its own hashing method, IIRC its 10,000 rounds of RIPEMD160 with a unique salt per user. This is as safe as it gets.

RIPEND160 is good and I think SHA-2 family is good too. I think bcrypt was suggested because it has a large time cost for each hash generated, which makes brute force attacks against any given password an infeasible proposition.

   -MZ

theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5194
Merit: 12982


View Profile
February 25, 2015, 03:00:35 PM
 #6

The idea that bcrypt is somehow extra strong is AFAIK entirely a myth. bcrypt is based on a fast Blowfish-based hash function comparable to SHA-256 and other cryptographically-secure hash functions. It makes the entire process slow by hashing the password many times. But this is exactly what any decent key derivation function does.

The forum uses sha256crypt (which has an extremely similar interface to bcrypt) with 7500 iterations. If SHA-256 and bcrypt's underlying hash function were exactly the same speed, this would be equivalent to a bcrypt cost of about 13. I prefer SHA-2 because Blowfish (and especially bcrypt's Blowfish-based hash function) are not as widely used or studied.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
Muhammed Zakir
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560
Merit: 506


I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!


View Profile WWW
February 25, 2015, 04:44:38 PM
 #7

If forum is using SHA-256, then it is fine for me! Bcrypt is indeed very slow compared to others and is somewhat similar to Bcrypt when Inread the comparison & above PDF. Thank you, theymos, for replying!

   -MZ

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!