View Single Post
Old 03-12-2025, 11:57 AM   #2654
jbjb
Somewhat clueless
jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jbjb ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 773
Karma: 9999999
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renate View Post
Quit exaggerating the difficulties!
Since the salt is MD5 hashed you'd only need 2^128 tables of 700 GB.
Good point - I'd missed that the response I was disagreeing with was specifically about MD5 hashes.

I'll have to think about whether the 128 bit hash of MD5 really limits the number of tables required. The 256 bit salt is added to the reduction-function-generated password at each stage of the hash chain, so even though there are only 2^128 possible hash values it still feels like the 2^256 tables would still be required.

I'm not sure, though, to be honest, so I'll have to think about it.

For algorithms that generate longer hashes, the 2^256 tables still apply, though, and in any case 2^128 700GB tables is still a bit beyond "trivial"
jbjb is offline   Reply With Quote