Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Password blog post #1

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
May 18, 2020
Merged

Password blog post #1

merged 10 commits into from
May 18, 2020

Conversation

cdepillabout
Copy link
Owner

This is a blog post announcing the new password-2.0 library.

Here is a rendered version: https://functor.tokyo/blog/draft/2020-05-16-password-2.0 (although note that the url will change when it has actually been fully published)

@cdepillabout
Copy link
Owner Author

@Vlix could you do a quick review of this blog post? Feel free to respond inline.

2020-05-16-password-2.0.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

https://github.com/cdepillabout/password/issues/20

- Add more password hashing algorithms.
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not really sure we NEED more password hashing algorithms.
The 4 major ones are good enough IMHO (and PBKDF2 is only in there for legacy reasons, I'd never advise someone to use it for a new application), though maybe more algorithms could be added for that same reason, just legacy/interoperability... 🤔

I WOULD like to add to this list the possibility to parse different formats of hashes for the same algorithm, so that checkPassword works with hashes produced by other (language's) libraries/programs.
(Maybe give a link to this hashcat page to show examples)

I'm not yet sure if it is a good idea to also have the format be adjustable in the hashPassword function... I don't see that having a good use case... but if someone would have a good use case, that'd be something that also COULD be worked on.

Copy link
Owner Author

@cdepillabout cdepillabout May 18, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sounds good. I removed the item for adding more password hashing algorithms, and I added a new item for parsing different formats in 35c722e.

I didn't link to the hashcat page, but I did link to cdepillabout/password#11. (If people click through, they will find the link to the hashcat page as well.)

I'm not yet sure if it is a good idea to also have the format be adjustable in the hashPassword function

I didn't explicitly talk about, but I imagine it could be helpful to have the format adjustable in the hashPassword function. I think in any complicated enterprise environment, you may have multiple applications reading and writing passwords stored in a single database. In that kind of environment, it would be nice to be able to easily produce password hashes in a format expected by all the other applications.

2020-05-16-password-2.0.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@Vlix
Copy link

Vlix commented May 17, 2020

On the whole looks like a nice concise announcement. Don't see any reason to nitpick much else.

I guess you could mention the fact that PasswordHashes use a phantom type, so the chances that you'd use the wrong algorithm's checkPassword on another algorithm's produced PasswordHash is reduced, but it's also not that big of a deal and not the point of the announcement.

@cdepillabout
Copy link
Owner Author

you could mention the fact that PasswordHashes use a phantom type

Good idea, I added this in a footnote in 2b5f5c4.

@cdepillabout cdepillabout merged commit 8fd57dc into master May 18, 2020
@cdepillabout cdepillabout deleted the password-blog-post branch May 18, 2020 02:58
@cdepillabout
Copy link
Owner Author

cdepillabout commented May 18, 2020

@Vlix Thanks for the review.

I released this blog post: https://functor.tokyo/blog/2020-05-18-password-2.0

I also posted this on twitter and reddit (in case you want to watch for questions/comments):


If you notice anything else that needs to fixed up in the post, please don't hesitate to post here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants