nanog mailing list archives
RE: MD5 is slow
From: Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2025 10:18:00 +0000
The simple integer division on the processor takes something like 40 cycles (fast). Hence, the factorization challenge should have thousands of bits. Then it is going to take millions of years for one processor to try all possibilities. If the password is just 12 letters (80 bits?), then the time to test the password should be longer. Or else the good processor would try all combinations for a limited time. Of course, a longer password would help a lot, but even 200 bits is not 2000. The check should be proportionally slower. It is especially a problem when we are dealing with predictable passwords based on human language words. Maybe SHA-2/3 have not been developed with "slowness" as a goal. It may be that only randomness was the target. Hence, so many assembler instructions for one round. But only the slowness permits its use for HMAC or the password fingerprint that you have discussed before. I could not believe that slowness is just a byproduct of randomness. It is so evident why it is needed by itself (for some applications). Ed/ -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Bellman via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2025 12:03 To: North American Network Operators Group <nanog () lists nanog org> Cc: Thomas Bellman <bellman () nsc liu se> Subject: Re: MD5 is slow On 2025-09-11 09:23, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG wrote:
SHA-2 and SHA-3 are used not only for networking, they are general. Hence, they were developed to be slow enough to prevent brute force for some other applications.
Since you are asserting that the hash functions must be "slow" in order to resist brute force attacks, could you
perhaps give us an estimate of *how* slow they must be? And how you arrive at that (e.g. how much resources does the
attacker deploy, and how long walltime do you give the attacker)?
/Bellman
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/SZV2BS2WTBZIF5TOK43UQ4GYGNSB4QVX/
Current thread:
- RE: MD5 is slow, (continued)
- RE: MD5 is slow Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG (Sep 12)
- RE: MD5 is slow Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG (Sep 10)
- Re: MD5 is slow Jay Acuna via NANOG (Sep 10)
- RE: MD5 is slow Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG (Sep 10)
- Re: MD5 is slow Matthew Petach via NANOG (Sep 09)
- RE: MD5 is slow Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG (Sep 09)
- Re: MD5 is slow Matthew Petach via NANOG (Sep 10)
- RE: MD5 is slow Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG (Sep 11)
- Re: MD5 is slow Saku Ytti via NANOG (Sep 11)
- Re: MD5 is slow Thomas Bellman via NANOG (Sep 11)
- RE: MD5 is slow Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG (Sep 11)
- RE: MD5 is too fast nanog--- via NANOG (Sep 11)
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- RE: MD5 is too fast nanog--- via NANOG (Sep 12)
- Re: MD5 is too fast Jay Acuna via NANOG (Sep 12)
- RE: MD5 is too fast Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG (Sep 14)
- Re: MD5 is too fast Mark Andrews via NANOG (Sep 14)
- RE: MD5 is too fast nanog--- via NANOG (Sep 14)
- RE: MD5 is too fast Riley O via NANOG (Sep 15)
- RE: MD5 is slow Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG (Sep 11)
- Re: MD5 is slow Chris Woodfield via NANOG (Sep 11)
- Re: MD5 is slow Jay Acuna via NANOG (Sep 11)
