Which of the following is the least secure hashing algorithm?

Which of the following is the least secure hashing algorithm?

Authentication in node.js – #6 password security

I agree with martinstoeckli; don’t make your own salts unless you’re confident in your skills. By design, it will generate the salt using /dev/urandom, which is based on noise from system drivers. CryptGenRandom is used on Windows (). Both have been around for a long time and are regarded as secure cryptography tools (the former probably more than the latter, though). Make no attempt to circumvent these defaults by creating something less safe. Anything that uses rand(), mt rand(), uniqid(), or variants of these functions is poor.
The password will be ***truncated*** at the first NULL-byte by password hash.
If you use something as an input that can produce NULL bytes (sha1 with raw set to true, or if NULL bytes can naturally end up in people’s passwords), you might end up with a much less safe application than you expected.
For bcrypt, the password $a = “01234567”; is zero bytes long (empty password).
The solution is to ensure that NULL-bytes are never transferred to password hash.

How quantum computers break encryption | shor’s algorithm

The Secure Hash Algorithms are a set of cryptographic hash functions published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) as a Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) in the United States. They include:
FIPS PUB 180 (original SHA), FIPS PUB 180-1 (SHA-1), and FIPS PUB 180-2 are the corresponding norms (SHA-1, SHA-256, SHA-384, and SHA-512). Separate from the Safe Hash Standard, NIST has revised Draft FIPS Publication 202, SHA-3 Standard (SHS).
The CMVP (Cryptographic Module Validation Program), a joint program run by the American National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Canadian Communications Security Establishment, validates all SHA-family algorithms as FIPS-approved security functions (CSE).

Episode 148: software archaeology with dave thomas

After reading so many posts about md5 vulnerabilities on the internet, I’m thinking about moving to a different hash algorithm. As far as I’m aware, it’s always been the preferred algorithm among many DBAs. Is using MD5 instead of (SHA1, SHA256, SHA384, SHA512) really that much easier, or is it just an efficiency issue?
What other hash would you suggest (considering data-bound applications as a platform)? I’m currently using salted hashes (MD5 salted hashes). Please take all md5 file hashes and password hashes into consideration.
It’s not a smart idea to use salted md5 for passwords. MD5 is common not because of its cryptographic flaws, but because it is fast. This means that on a single GPU, an attacker can try billions of candidate passwords per second.
Scrypt, bcrypt, and PBKDF2 are examples of intentionally slow hash constructions to use. Because it’s easy, like most general-purpose hashes, simple salted SHA-2 isn’t good enough. For more information about what you can use, see How to safely hash passwords?

On the security of the pkcs#1 v1.5 signature scheme

But first, let’s describe a hash, and then we’ll look at how SSL certificates use hashes to form digital signatures. Before you can understand what SHA-1 and SHA-2 are, you must first comprehend these concepts.
Hashes are useful in situations where computers need to classify, compare, or perform other calculations on files and strings of data. Comparing the original files is more difficult for the machine than computing a hash and then comparing the values.
Determinism is one of the most essential properties of hashing algorithms. Any machine that understands the hashing algorithm you’ve chosen will compute the hash of our example sentence locally and get the same result.
If you remember just one thing from this section, remember that cryptographic hash algorithms generate irreversible and unique hashes. Irreversible means that even though you just had the hash, you wouldn’t be able to find out what the original piece of data was, keeping the original data safe and unknown. The next section explains why this is so significant. Unique means that no two pieces of data will ever generate the same hash.

About the author


View all posts