News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Speed Hashing by pbsd on Friday April 06, 2012 @10:10AM (#3807187)
The first question is an open one. Not even theoretical cryptography people understand collision resistance very well. From a practical standpoint, though, we know that it can be pulled off reasonably fast; SHA-256 is still standing, for example, and it "only" takes 14 cycles per byte hashed. Not great, but not bad either.

The first written mention of artificially slowing down key derivation was (AFAIK) here: https://www.schneier.com/paper-low-entropy.html The rationale was that, given a key (resp. password) that gives you s bits of security, you apply some function that gives you extra t bits of security, by making bruteforcing it 2^t times more expensive.

Also note that some applications of hash functions don't care about collisions. MD5 is still OK-ish for e.g. HMAC, where what matters is second-preimage resistance.

Re:Speed Hashing by cperciva on Friday April 06, 2012 @11:54AM (#3807630)
Morris and Thompson beat Schneier et al. by about two decades; see Password security: a case history, CACM 1979.