Re: Salt in encrypted password in pg_shadow

From: David Garamond <lists(at)zara(dot)6(dot)isreserved(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Salt in encrypted password in pg_shadow
Date: 2004-09-08 02:11:33
Message-ID: 413E6A55.7060704@zara.6.isreserved.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Tom Lane wrote:
>>Many people use short and easy-to-guess passwords (remember we're not
>>talking about the superuser only here), so the dictionary attack can be
>>more effective than people think.
>
> And that responds to the speed argument how? I quite agree that a
> guessable password is risky, but putting in a random salt offers no
> real advantage if the salt has to be stored in the same place as the
> encrypted password.

Hm, I thought the purpose of salt is generally well understood? A
well-known string such as "postgres" is *not* a good salt at all.

Here's a couple of pages that hopefully can explain better:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictionary_attack
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_(cryptography)

--
dave

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-09-08 02:27:40 Re: Salt in encrypted password in pg_shadow
Previous Message David Garamond 2004-09-08 02:02:58 Re: Restoring dump of multiuser databases