# Tag Info

0

I think that this notation "$(A,N_X,T_B),K_{BS}$" isn't correct and must be transcripted as "$(A,N_X,T_B).K_{BS}$", which could be interpreted as the resulting cipherText of "$(A,N_X,T_B)$ under the Key $K_{BS}$". Under these conditions, we could try to understand that the attacker X begin by impersonating A, by sending to B the plainText $(A,N_X)$ X: ...

0

There are alot of trade-offs ina various tasks. People actually CAN do the things you're describing, and the question is not just about the particular task. The problem/point is, that there's no option in - for example - OpenSSL : what to use? CPU-costly or Memory-costly algo? That's a pity that there is no such option. And usually you're forced to do this ...

3

The premise that people cannot make a memory intensive password hashing function is incorrect. scrypt does approximately what is described in the question. Of course you still want to limit the amount of memory, especially if many of these hashes are to be calculated in parallel. Furthermore, you could have a look at the password hashing competition where ...

1

In theory, it is not: TOTP, like HOTP, is based on a Hash-based message authentication code (HMAC), which in turn relies on a cryptographic hash. Both the key, and the HMAC message (a time counter in TOTP) are hashed using the specified cryptographic hash. One key goal of cryptographic hashes is: it should be infeasible to generate a message that has a ...

Top 50 recent answers are included