On 08/15/2012 11:22 AM, Joe Conway wrote:
> On 08/15/2012 06:48 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 6:11 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>>>> Is there a TODO here?
>> If anybody's concerned about the security of our password storage,
>> they'd be much better off working on improving the length and randomness
>> of the salt string than replacing the md5 hash per se.
> Or change to an md5 HMAC rather than straight md5 with salt. Last I
> checked (which admittedly was a while ago) there were still no known
> cryptographic weaknesses associated with an HMAC based on md5.
>
Possibly. I still think the right time to revisit this whole area will
be when the NIST Hash Function competition ends supposedly later this
year. See <http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/ST/hash/timeline.html>. At that
time we should probably consider moving our password handling to use the
new standard function.
cheers
andrew
