[OWASP-ESAPI] About owasp-esapi-java

Lucas Ferreira listas at sapao.net
Fri May 22 12:14:43 EDT 2009


Matt,

as far as I know, there are no conclusive results on the composition
of hash functions, but I never heard this theory of decrease in the
security by composing them.

The study of hash functions will certainly advance due to the NIST
competition to define the new US standard hash function, so we better
wait to have meaningful results before concluding anything on this
topic.

Regards,

Lucas

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 09:53, Matthew Presson
<matthew.presson at gmail.com> wrote:
> I have heard from varying sources that hashing something multiple times does
> not actually increase security at all.  In many cases I have heard that it
> actually decreases security due to the potential to increase the possibility
> of a collision.
>
> Any thoughts on this?
>
>
> -Matt
>
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 12:10 AM, Bedirhan Urgun <urgunb at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I agree with the idea that "as long as it is configurable everything is
>> cool". It's not the case right now in 1.4.x but fixed. Thanks.
>> One of our key goals was to have a faster mvc implementation and currently
>> we use the hash method to produce a CSRF token (being aware that are other
>> ways). So we might just stick to 1 as a default value.
>>
>> cheers,
>> bedirhan
>>
>> > From: jim.manico at owasp.org
>> > To: eric.bing at oracle.com; owasp-esapi at lists.owasp.org
>> > Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 11:12:08 -1000
>> > Subject: Re: [OWASP-ESAPI] About owasp-esapi-java
>> >
>> > > I think the most important point is that I can override whatever value
>> > > is set for a particular use case. I haven't looked at the APIs here,
>> > > so
>> > > I'm not sure if that's the case.
>> >
>> > Yea, I see the light. I think you are right on here Eric (and Arshan).
>> >
>> > Perhaps we should expose HashIterations at the API level so programmers
>> > can
>> > make their own call as to the # of hash iterations, and default this to
>> > 1
>> > which is the expected hash level?
>> >
>> > I can see where different use cases merit different iteration numbers,
>> > and
>> > defaulting to 1 which is the expected hash behaviour, does seems
>> > reasonable
>> > to me.
>> >
>> > But for all my apps, I'm setting it to 1024 :)
>> >
>> > - Jim
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "eric bing" <eric.bing at oracle.com>
>> > To: <owasp-esapi at lists.owasp.org>
>> > Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 10:59 AM
>> > Subject: Re: [OWASP-ESAPI] About owasp-esapi-java
>> >
>> >
>> > >I tend to agree with Arshan on this one. There are certainly cases
>> > > (password or credit card hashes) where the retention time and small
>> > > name
>> > > space make this essential, but there are a lot of other cases (session
>> > > hashing) where its not. Given that both use cases exist, my naive
>> > > assumption going into the library is that its only being run once. On
>> > > the other hand, its legitimate to argue that you want to default to a
>> > > more secure configuration.
>> > >
>> > > I think the most important point is that I can override whatever value
>> > > is set for a particular use case. I haven't looked at the APIs here,
>> > > so
>> > > I'm not sure if that's the case.
>> > > -Eric
>> > >
>> > >> Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 16:23:36 -0400
>> > >> From: "Arshan Dabirsiaghi" <arshan.dabirsiaghi at aspectsecurity.com>
>> > >> Subject: Re: [OWASP-ESAPI] About owasp-esapi-java
>> > >> To: "Jim Manico" <jim.manico at owasp.org>, <jeffl.williams at owasp.org>,
>> > >> "Bedirhan Urgun" <urgunb at hotmail.com>, <owasp-esapi at lists.owasp.org>
>> > >> Message-ID:
>> > >> <B9A412898630124ABE8350F4EBD32E84F437BE at mymail.aspectsecurity.com>
>> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>> > >>
>> > >> Of course it is.
>> > >>
>> > >> I'm saying most people, if they knew that this was going on, would
>> > >> choose
>> > >> not to use it because of the limited benefits it provides. It's
>> > >> possible
>> > >> that I'm wrong - I have no data to support that opinion. I just know
>> > >> lots
>> > >> of developers who generally like things to be really fast.
>> > >>
>> > >> Arshan
>> > >>
>> > >> ________________________________
>> > >>
>> > >> From: Jim Manico [mailto:jim.manico at owasp.org]
>> > >> Sent: Thu 5/21/2009 4:09 PM
>> > >> To: Arshan Dabirsiaghi; jeffl.williams at owasp.org; Bedirhan Urgun;
>> > >> owasp-esapi at lists.owasp.org
>> > >> Subject: Re: [OWASP-ESAPI] About owasp-esapi-java
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> Arshan,
>> > >>
>> > >> The slowness is by design, intending to make it slower for someone
>> > >> with
>> > >> database access to brute-force the hash back to the password.
>> > >>
>> > >> - Jim
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> ----- Original Message -----
>> > >> From: Arshan Dabirsiaghi
>> > >> <mailto:arshan.dabirsiaghi at aspectsecurity.com>
>> > >> To: jeffl.williams at owasp.org ; Bedirhan Urgun
>> > >> <mailto:urgunb at hotmail.com>
>> > >> ; owasp-esapi at lists.owasp.org
>> > >> Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 10:05 AM
>> > >> Subject: Re: [OWASP-ESAPI] About owasp-esapi-java
>> > >>
>> > >> The HashIterations value is a form of key strengthening [1]. Am I
>> > >> alone
>> > >> in thinking this value should be 1 (essentially off) by default? I'm
>> > >> not
>> > >> suggesting hashing is expensive as search, but I think people would
>> > >> not
>> > >> like the performance results of this feature. After all, it's
>> > >> intended to
>> > >> be slow.
>> > >>
>> > >> Arshan
>> > >>
>> > >> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_strengthening
>> > >>
>> > >> ________________________________
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> 4. There's a HashIterations property key in ESAPI.properties. But
>> > >> this
>> > >> isn't used in org.owasp.esapi.reference.JavaEncyptor's hash method.
>> > >> Instead there's a hardcoded 1024.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> Good catch. This has been fixed so the hash iterations are
>> > >> configurable
>> > >> now. Thanks!
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> --Jeff
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> ________________________________
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> _______________________________________________
>> > >> OWASP-ESAPI mailing list
>> > >> OWASP-ESAPI at lists.owasp.org
>> > >> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-esapi
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> -------------- next part --------------
>> > >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> > >> URL:
>> > >>
>> > >> https://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-esapi/attachments/20090521/40e3de6d/attachment.html
>> > >>
>> > >> ------------------------------
>> > >>
>> > >> _______________________________________________
>> > >> OWASP-ESAPI mailing list
>> > >> OWASP-ESAPI at lists.owasp.org
>> > >> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-esapi
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> End of OWASP-ESAPI Digest, Vol 20, Issue 8
>> > >> ******************************************
>> > >>
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > OWASP-ESAPI mailing list
>> > > OWASP-ESAPI at lists.owasp.org
>> > > https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-esapi
>> > >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > OWASP-ESAPI mailing list
>> > OWASP-ESAPI at lists.owasp.org
>> > https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-esapi
>>
>> ________________________________
>> Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync. Check it out.
>> _______________________________________________
>> OWASP-ESAPI mailing list
>> OWASP-ESAPI at lists.owasp.org
>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-esapi
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matt Presson, CISSP
>
> _______________________________________________
> OWASP-ESAPI mailing list
> OWASP-ESAPI at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-esapi
>
>



-- 
If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to see it, do the
other trees make fun of it?


More information about the OWASP-ESAPI mailing list