Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This makes PBKDFs very di fferent than the general-purpose KDFs studied here. In particular, while passwords can be modeled as a source of keying material, this source has too little entropy to meaningfully apply our extractor approach except when modeling the hash function as a random oracle. Also the slowing-down approach of PBKDFs is undesirable for non-password settings


But, as mentioned by @cperciva elsewhere in this thread, generating a key and creating a password hash are nearly synonymous. Using HKDF for passwords would be silly, but the more interesting question is: when would you use scrypt for key derivation in a system?

More to the point: what are the tradeoffs you'd consider in choosing one over the other?

(Addressed more to @cperciva...) I'm assuming tarsnap uses scrypt as its actual key derivation function for file encryption and authentication. Why scrypt instead of something else (and I have faith that it's not "not invented here" syndrome)?


I'm quoting the actual paper.


I am aware. I did read it before I posted it.


So you think maybe Hugo Krawczyk is mistaken? :)

Short answer: I think scrypt is an advancement over the class of constructions HKDF belongs to. If you're picking nits about which function to use, use scrypt.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: