Salting Hashes - why is the salt treated by the literature as being known to Eve?

后端 未结 5 832
轻奢々
轻奢々 2021-01-17 06:11

The title says everything. I don\'t understand: why you shouldn\'t keep your salt a secret like the password. Or did I misunderstand something?

相关标签:
5条回答
  • 2021-01-17 06:51

    As said above, unique secret salt for each password will prevent anyone from pre-computing the hashes in a rainbow table; this is the sole purpose of unique salts.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2021-01-17 06:54

    The salt is treated as public primarily because keeping it secret isn't necessary.

    The point of salt is primarily to make dictionary attacks more difficult/less practical. In a dictionary attack, the attacker hashes common words from a dictionary, and (if he's serious at all) supplements those with things like common names. Equipped with this, if he can get a hold of your list of hashed passwords, he can see if any of them matches a hash in his list. Assuming you have a significant number of users, he has a pretty good chance of finding at least one. When he does, he looks in his list to find what word produced that hash, and he can now use it to log in and impersonate that user.

    Adding a salt means that instead of doing this once, he has to do it once for each possible salt value. For example, if you use a 24-bit salt, he has to hash each word in the dictionary ~16 million times, and store the results of all ~16 million hashes.

    Just for the sake of argument, let's assume that without salt, it would take the attacker 8 hours to hash all the candidate words, and 16 megabytes to store the results (hashes and word that produced each). We'll further assume that the storage is equally divided between the hashes themselves and the list of words/names/whatever that produced them.

    Using the same 24-bit salt, that means his time is multiplied by the same factor of ~16 million. His storage for the words that produced the hashes remains the same, but for the hashes themselves is (again) multiplied by the ~16 million. Working out the math, those come out to approximately 15,000 years of computation and 128 terabytes of storage.

    In short, without salt, a dictionary attack is within easy reach of almost anybody. I could easily believe that (for example) somebody would let their computer run overnight to do the hashing just to pull a good April fools joke on a few of his co-workers (easy to believe, because I've seen it done).

    When you get down to it, it's all a numbers game: a dictionary attack isn't betting that every user will have a password that's easy to guess, only that enough will for them to find at least a few open holes. Likewise, making the salt public does allow a somewhat simpler attack, by downloading the salt for each hash, and doing individual dictionary attacks on each, using the known salt for each one. Assuming a system has fewer users than possible hash values, this is a more practical attack. Nonetheless, he's now stuck with attacking each password individually, rather than using a single dictionary not only for an entire system, but in fact for all systems he might want to attack that use the same hash algorithm.

    In summary: salt can do its job perfectly well even though it's made public. One of the aims of almost any security system is to minimize the amount of information that needs to be kept secret. Since salt can work even if it is public, it's generally assumed to be public knowledge. In a practical system, you certainly don't try to publish it to attackers, but you don't (shouldn't, anyway) rely on its remaining a secret either.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2021-01-17 07:01

    The purpose of salt is making an attack on several crypted passwords at the same time harder. It doesn't make an attack on a single crypted password harder.

    With a salt, an attacker has to test each candidate plaintext password once for every different salt.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2021-01-17 07:05

    You should keep your salt a secret for the same reason that you salt in the first place.

    Hackers can and have created Rainbow Tables whereby they hash using (md5, sha1, sha256, sha512, etc.) a list of the top 1,000 or so most common passwords.

    If a hacker manages to get a hold of your database... its good that your passwords are hashed, but if they do a quick comparison and find a hash that matches one they have in their list, they know what the password is for that account.

    The key to them doing the hack, is having that rainbow table handy. If you've added a salt, their rainbow table is useless... but if you make the salt east to find or you share it with others, then the hackers can re-build a new rainbow table using your salt.(*) e.g. you've made it easier for them to hack.

    (*) Note this is a little harder than described, since the hacker may not know if you added the salt as a prefix, suffix, both, etc.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2021-01-17 07:14

    The reason as I found in this article is, that you actually need the salt to check an incoming password with the salted and hashed one in your database.

    0 讨论(0)
提交回复
热议问题