New answers tagged

4

Would there be any additional benefit to this scheme? Not really; password hashing is storing the hashed password in this form: $$H( \text{password}, \text{salt} )$$ where $H$ is some hard-to-compute hash function. What you are suggesting is to replace this with: $$H( \text{password}, D( \text{password}, \text{encrypted_salt}) )$$ (where $D$ is the ...


0

Yes, the location of specific symbols present always helps, as any impossible combination doesn't have to be tried. Either the algorithm to generate passwords (a counter to password function) doesn't need to generate it or the password can be directly skipped. These operations usually take much less CPU time than verifying that the password is correct or not ...


1

The combination of different schemes may be somewhat advantageous with regard to certain custom hardware (ASICs), but I think that the disadvantages outweigh them. I assume that there is some kind of fixed time that is acceptable to the user. Nobody will use a procedure where she or he has to wait several minutes. Modern password hashing schemes are ...


1

In every of these options the essential step is to save it in secure place. Instead of implementing any of these options, just tell the user to keep the password in the same secure place that you have in mind for the 2nd key. All major risks will be the same as for keeping there the 2nd key, but this solution will cost you nothing - no implementation, no ...


Top 50 recent answers are included